| 1 |
On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 14:31, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 2003-05-22 at 19:12, Vadim wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I think that Gentoo needs some better way of describing packages. For example, |
| 4 |
> > I think it would also be a good idea to add longer descriptions, like those |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> It's a nice idea. On the theme of metadata that runs throughout the |
| 7 |
> entire distribution however there is a common argument against it. The |
| 8 |
> current information points the user to the package homepage which is |
| 9 |
> considered as the most uptodate and proficient resource of that |
| 10 |
> information. This also prevents information duplication and the need to |
| 11 |
> maintain it. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
While I agree that maintenance is a good thing to keep to a minumum, the |
| 14 |
description of a package isn't something that changes much (if ever) |
| 15 |
over its life, so I don't think that should pose too much of an issue. |
| 16 |
And the information duplication in this case serves a purpose: it means |
| 17 |
that I don't have to look up a webpage. If I'm looking for a text editor |
| 18 |
in Portage, I don't want to browse 10 web pages just to get a basic idea |
| 19 |
of the differences between the options. If information duplication saves |
| 20 |
that amount of time, and doesn't significantly add to the maintenance |
| 21 |
overhead, I say go for it. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
- John Robinson |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Love justice; desire mercy. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives