On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 07:36:25PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > It is generated by our tooling. We could remove it, I don't think it is > > indeed usefull. > > policy §3.4 says: "The description should describe the package (the program) > to > a user (system administrator) who has never met it before so that they have > enough information to decide whether they want to install it." > > If you don't think it's useful, you might remove it. Otherwise, I think it > should have a description complying with §3.4.
librust-*-dev packages aren't meant to be consumed by users, so I'm not sure the policy applies. There are people working on a proposal to exclude librust-* from the "regular" repos, which is currently necessary due to technical limitations in debian. Whether or not aho-corasick should exist instead of just librust-aho-corasick-dev is a valid question of course. > > > Also, when I use codesearch: > > > > > > https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=This+package+contains+the+following+binaries+built+from+the+Rust+crate&literal=1 > > > > > > Then there are a lot of packages which just say "This package contains > > > the following binaries built from the Rust crate" in their long > > > description. How is this useful? > > > > Not sure how this is related?! > > It seems that there are many packages with this autogenerated description and > that aho-corasick is just one of many. Does this make sense to the rust > maintainers to auto-generate long descriptions that do not add much of what is > the intended value of the description field? We generally welcome new volunteers in #debian-rust, although most of the volunteer time is eaten by maintaining the version constraints of our 800 packages. :(