On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 07:28:38PM +0930, Simon Lees wrote:
On 05/19/2017 07:02 PM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Friday, 19 May 2017 10:55 Stephan Kulow wrote:
Put yourself in a reviewer's shoes for a moment. The rpmlint check about this summary thing is pretty old - and afaik not even a SUSE thing, but an upstream check.
Sure - but there was a proposal to promote this warning to an error. I seriously doubt promoting it to an error would be significanly easier than dropping it.
Plus it's really easy to fix if you see it. And the fact that packages are submitted without it being fixed indicates to reviewers that people ignore rpmlint (and they are right as far as my person is concerned :).
Yes, easy to fix... Just talking about summary, IIRC it's
- must not end with a period - must not start with uppercase (or lowercase? Can't remember) letter - must not start with an article - must not contain package name (which is funny if it's a common word) - must not be longer than description (even for subpackages)
Other then the "must not start with an article" which even I as a native English speaker don't understand, I think these are reasonable, when loading Yast to search for something the first thing you see is the package summary so personally I think maintaining reasonable quality summaries is important. Its also something that
Such kind of "beautification" can however be just warnings and addressed by submission from people that care about them. Like Jan does for %description rewrites. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org