Bug#711475: useless package description

[Justin B Rye]

Martin Eberhard Schauer wrote:
> for poor package descriptions. In general there was a prompt response with a
> considerably improved text.

Well, I'm usually ready to offer my assistance with wobbly grammar,
but here the problem seems to be a shortage of content.

# Description: Tools for accessing secret store
#  Provides tools for accessing the secret store.

That makes it sound like a case of
"http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLittleShopThatWasntThereYesterday";

The README file is one noun phrase long:
 GObject based library for accessing the Secret Service API.
 
So apparently this might make sense to GNOME developers?  Or perhaps
people in the Secret Service, which would explain a lot.  But wait,
there's a man page in here:

# NAME
#   secret-tool - Store and retrieve passwords
[...]
# DESCRIPTION
#   secret-tool is a command line tool that can be used to store and
#   retrieve passwords.
#
#   Each password is stored in an item. Items are uniquely identified by a
#   set of attribute keys and values. When storing a password you must
#   specify unique pairs of attributes names and values, and when looking
#   up a password you provide the same attribute name and value pairs.
[...]

Er, root login passwords?  Online banking passwords?  There's still a
substantial chunk of basic context missing...

A few minutes googling tells me the "Secret Service API" is a
freedesktop thing based on dbus that's designed to replace KWallet and
GNOME Keyring.

So far, my best guess is that the package description should say
something like:

  Description: tool for storing and retrieving GObject passwords
   This package provides a command line tool using libsecret to access
   the freedesktop.org Secret Service API. This can be used to store
   and retrieve passwords for desktop applications.

I'm still not clear whether this is GNOME-specific or cross-desktop,
though.
-- 
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#711475: useless package description

[Helmut Grohne]

On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 12:47:59PM +0200, Martin Eberhard Schauer wrote:
> sometime ago I was hinted to place the following line in my bug report
> 
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-l10n-engl...@lists.debian.org
> 
> for poor package descriptions. In general there was a prompt response with a
> considerably improved text.

Thanks for the hint and for actually pulling it in!

> BTW: I did not understand yet whether I can use X-Debbugs-CC after
> the initial
> bug report.

X-Debbugs-Cc is only useful for initial submission. When reporting a
bug, you do not yet know what number is going to be assigned, so if you
Cc someone, they won't know either. In contrast when using X-Debbugs-Cc,
the submission mail is only copied after the number is assigned and the
message is modified to include the assigned number. In a follow up mail
you directly put the corresponding bug in To or Cc, so other recipients
can look up the number there.

Helmut


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#711475: useless package description

[Martin Eberhard Schauer]

Dear Helmut,

sometime ago I was hinted to place the following line in my bug report

X-Debbugs-CC: debian-l10n-engl...@lists.debian.org

for poor package descriptions. In general there was a prompt response with a
considerably improved text.

Martin

BTW: I did not understand yet whether I can use X-Debbugs-CC after the 
initial

bug report.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org