| 1 |
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 08:57:09 +0200 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Thanks, this explains why these DESCRIPTIONs are there. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> But history left aside, are they still useful today? If not, then they |
| 7 |
> should be removed. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
DESCRIPTION="Based on the ${ECLASS} eclass" is never a sufficient |
| 10 |
description for a package. So clearly pointless here. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Currently only KEYWORDS are banned from eclasses. I would add |
| 13 |
DESCRIPTION and LICENSE to this list as well. DESCRIPTION is individual |
| 14 |
to the package and it should never be to much work to come up with a |
| 15 |
short description and LICENSE in eclasses greatly increases the chances |
| 16 |
for the final listed licenses to be wrong. We have seen the latter |
| 17 |
happening with the enlightenment.eclass. |
Archives