Web lists-archives.com

Re: node-tty-browserify_0.0.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED




On വെള്ളി 10 ഫെബ്രുവരി 2017 09:51 രാവിലെ, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Pirate Praveen <praveen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> On വ്യാഴം 09 ഫെബ്രുവരി 2017 11:48 വൈകു, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> 
>>> It doesn't matter that your package is small and that users won't
>>> normally install it directly. It's still mandated that it includes a
>>> description, and ftpmasters are only doing their job.
> 
>> That is like treating debian policy a holy book that is perfect till
>> eternity and that will not be changed.
> 
> I think it's quite unlikely as a project that we're ever going to change
> Policy to say that packages don't have to have descriptions.
> 
> If it's worth packaging, there's some reason why it's worth packaging, and
> there's some function that software fills.  All people are asking is that
> this is documented in the package metadata.  I realize this is
> particularly irritating for Node packages because they're so small and
> there are so many of them, but *because* they're so small, usually it's
> fairly easy to explain what they do?
> 
> I did about five minutes of Googling as a result of this thread, and
> here's the description I came up with:
> 
>     Provides a tiny stub implementation of the tty module of the Node core
>     library that always returns false to isatty and throws not implemented
>     errors if ReadStream or WriteStream are called.
> 
> I agree that it's quite irritating that upstream didn't bother to put
> something like that into any of the package metadata and released a
> package with an empty README.markdown file.
> 

Thanks for this description. I will try to write more description, but
its not very easy always especially when you are not allowed to write
sample code. When it is a single function, the user of that library is
usually a programmer that wants to use the function in their code, but
policy forbids writing sample code and some packages were rejected for
including the sample code (we started including sample code after
discussions about lack of good descriptions). When you are not allowed
to write 2 lines of sample code when that is the best possible
description to the target audience, its very irritating.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature