Web lists-archives.com

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

On 10/02/2017 06:47, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> 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:
>> [...]
> 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.
The users of the library being programmers does not mean the users of
the _package_ will be programmers. If I'm installing packages during a
site wide upgrade I am going to examine the packages that get pulled in
as well as the ones I specifically install. Descriptions help greatly in
this regard. The target audience of packages in Debian are Debian users,
not necessarily just those who are developers

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature