1 |
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:47 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> First, a sentence does not need to have a predicate. I know that for 99% |
4 |
> sure in german and the english wikipedia article seems to suggest the |
5 |
> same. Correct me if I am wrong. |
6 |
> |
7 |
|
8 |
In English your typical English class would teach that every sentence |
9 |
must have a predicate. From what Google tells me it technically isn't |
10 |
entirely true, but every sentence generally does contain a verb. So, |
11 |
"library that implements SSL" is not a sentence under any |
12 |
circumstances. |
13 |
|
14 |
> Second, there are valid descriptions that are full ordinary sentences |
15 |
> without referencing ${PN}: |
16 |
> "Access a working SSH implementation by means of a library". |
17 |
> |
18 |
> In addition, repoman doesn't check for full sentences that reference |
19 |
> ${PN}, such as: |
20 |
> "Portage is the package management and distribution system for Gentoo". |
21 |
> |
22 |
> So we have another (useless) repoman warning with false positives. |
23 |
> |
24 |
|
25 |
Yeah, at best this seems a bit trivial. Do we have a policy that |
26 |
descriptions aren't allowed to be complete sentences? Many of our |
27 |
developers are not native English speakers in the first place, so |
28 |
striving for grammatical perfection is a bit optimistic. On top of |
29 |
that, repoman certainly isn't a native English speaker, so expecting |
30 |
it to achieve grammatical perfection is a really tall order. And |
31 |
please don't suggest making languagetool a dependency for portage... |
32 |
|
33 |
I don't have a problem with QA recommending new tree policies, but if |
34 |
they're going to do this the QA team ought to first ensure that the |
35 |
team agrees (however they want to govern that), and then communicate |
36 |
the policy before implementing it. I'd also implement it in |
37 |
documentation before doing so in repoman, otherwise we're going to |
38 |
have a repoman full of 800 rules whose origin is a mystery. I'm fine |
39 |
with QA policies going into effect by default, but communicating them |
40 |
allows objections to be raised and an appeal made to Council if |
41 |
necessary before we get too far along. This isn't just about due |
42 |
process - it is hard for developers to even comply with a policy they |
43 |
are unaware of. |
44 |
|
45 |
Rich |