Your message dated Sun, 18 May 2025 10:43:10 +0000 (UTC)
with message-id
<[email protected]>
and subject line Re: improve descriptions of programming-language sections
has caused the Debian Bug report #802488,
regarding improve descriptions of programming-language sections
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
802488: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=802488
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
https://packages.debian.org/unstable/
seems to be the canonical list of sections and their descriptions. I assume
this is
under the purview of ftp-masters. If not, please re-assign.
Most programming-language specific sections have a description of the form
Everything about <language>.
This doesn't tell me much.
To be specific, the packages being put into, say "python", seem to fall into two
broad categories:
1. programs written in python: e.g. agtl, custodia, mat, openstack-dashboard
2. programs and libraries useful to people developing in python: e.g. cython,
pypy,
python-*, twistedchecker
My personal opinion is that there is no point putting class 1 into "python". If
you agree, the description should probably reflect that.
Suggestion:
Development tools and libraries useful to people developing in <language>
I was also pondering "... useful to <language> developers" but this could be
mis-read as people developing the language itself.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
For example looking at package mat that you mentioned. In what section
shall this package appear? As long as you don't want to add more
sections, which make things even more confusing, this would go into
"Miscellaneous" (btw. this happened with mat2 meanwhile).
Does that sound more descriptive? At the moment you know at least that
mat was written in python.
So, sorry, I don't agree with your opinion and close this bug again.
Thorsten
--- End Message ---
