Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Friday 19 October 2012 15:01:57 Pacho Ramos wrote:
> At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would
> you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman
> warning?
actually the opposite here ... DESCRIPTION should be a sentence fragment, and
should avoid useless self referencing. such as starting with "${PN} is ...".
thanks, i can already connect the ${PN} to this description.
i clean that up (and delete the trailing dot) whenever i see it.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
El dom, 21-10-2012 a las 09:34 +0800, Ben de Groot escribió: > On 20 October 2012 03:01, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Hello > > > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > > warning? > > In English, phrases don't end with a full stop. As has been argued > elsewhere in this thread, using full stops (periods, dots) is > unnecessary, redundant, and ugly. > > It is my professional opinion, as an English teacher, that we should > *never* use full stops in DESCRIPTION fields. > > If we are to use a repoman warning, we should encourage people to NOT > use a full stop at the end of their description phrases. Also, the > package name should not be repeated as part of the description. > Yes, looks like I was wrong and the proper is to not end with a dot. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On 20 October 2012 03:01, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Hello > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > warning? In English, phrases don't end with a full stop. As has been argued elsewhere in this thread, using full stops (periods, dots) is unnecessary, redundant, and ugly. It is my professional opinion, as an English teacher, that we should *never* use full stops in DESCRIPTION fields. If we are to use a repoman warning, we should encourage people to NOT use a full stop at the end of their description phrases. Also, the package name should not be repeated as part of the description. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:36:36 +0200 Thomas Sachau wrote: > Pacho Ramos schrieb: > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", > > would you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a > > repoman warning? DESCRIPTIONs don't and shouldn't contain complete sentences. If they do, they should be fixed. Wrong description, and grammatically correct: foo-1.ebuild: "Foo is a tool that does bar." Correct description, and grammatically correct: foo-1.ebuild: "a tool that does bar" The point is that you're writing a dictionary entry, and not telling a story. > I dont know any such requirement from english nor german and neither > do i see any benefit from adding a dot at the end of the DESCRIPTION > variable. So if you want to have a unified behaviour all over the > tree, i would request all descriptions to be without the final dot. +1 jer
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 16:27:05 +0200 Peter Stuge wrote: > Pacho Ramos wrote: > > sentence... > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)#Major_and_minor_sentences > > Suggests that even a phrase such as the second example above can be > called a (minor) sentence. Ah, good to know. In Polish this thing is called differently from sentences, that's why I got it confused. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
El sáb, 20-10-2012 a las 16:27 +0200, Peter Stuge escribió: > Pacho Ramos wrote: > > > So, rephrasing the example Alexandre pasted, consider: > > > > > > x11-libs/qt-core - The Qt toolkit is a comprehensive C++ application > > >development framework. > > > > > > vs. > > > > > > x11-libs/qt-core - A comprehensive C++ application development framework > > > > > > Which one is better, in your opinion? > > > > Well, I my case I would prefer second > > I agree, I also like the second example. > > > > sentence... > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)#Major_and_minor_sentences > > Suggests that even a phrase such as the second example above can be > called a (minor) sentence. > > > > but it would still end with a dot. > > I think that looks ugly and is redundant. > > Especially if we were to require that all DESCRIPTION phrases must > always be presented with a full stop, I think it is a very bad idea > to enforce that they are written into the ebuilds. Especially if > there is a rule that they will always be terminated by a full stop > then that should and must be added by tools using the ebuild. > > It makes absolutely no sense to have so frequent redundant data in > ebuilds, and it seems like full stop or no full stop is a matter of > presentation policy and should thus happen during presentation. > > > > But if it sounds rare for you, no problem. > > ebuilds are markup and not formatting IMO, and the two shouldn't be > confused. If you want to work on presentation (which is important > too!) then go for it, but in any case I don't think a full stop at > end of descriptions is really worth the cost. All user interfaces are > shitty enough already, and users are unable to deal with information > already, so please don't add redundancy like full stops would be to > the problem. > > > //Peter Well, no problem in either way we finally choose (either "." or not), was simply trying to know what is preferred and try to unify the handling. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
Pacho Ramos wrote: > > So, rephrasing the example Alexandre pasted, consider: > > > > x11-libs/qt-core - The Qt toolkit is a comprehensive C++ application > >development framework. > > > > vs. > > > > x11-libs/qt-core - A comprehensive C++ application development framework > > > > Which one is better, in your opinion? > > Well, I my case I would prefer second I agree, I also like the second example. > sentence... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics)#Major_and_minor_sentences Suggests that even a phrase such as the second example above can be called a (minor) sentence. > but it would still end with a dot. I think that looks ugly and is redundant. Especially if we were to require that all DESCRIPTION phrases must always be presented with a full stop, I think it is a very bad idea to enforce that they are written into the ebuilds. Especially if there is a rule that they will always be terminated by a full stop then that should and must be added by tools using the ebuild. It makes absolutely no sense to have so frequent redundant data in ebuilds, and it seems like full stop or no full stop is a matter of presentation policy and should thus happen during presentation. > But if it sounds rare for you, no problem. ebuilds are markup and not formatting IMO, and the two shouldn't be confused. If you want to work on presentation (which is important too!) then go for it, but in any case I don't think a full stop at end of descriptions is really worth the cost. All user interfaces are shitty enough already, and users are unable to deal with information already, so please don't add redundancy like full stops would be to the problem. //Peter pgpJU4HyNX5kN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On 19/10/12 22:01, Pacho Ramos wrote: Hello At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman warning? Thanks for your opinions I've just dropped the dot from sci-calculators/galculator without reading this thread The ending dot looks... umm... stupid. So another +1 for the 'without dot camp' :P - Samuli
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Thomas Sachau wrote: > Pacho Ramos schrieb: >> At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", >> would you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a >> repoman warning? > I dont know any such requirement from english nor german and neither > do i see any benefit from adding a dot at the end of the DESCRIPTION > variable. So if you want to have a unified behaviour all over the > tree, i would request all descriptions to be without the final dot. +1
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
El vie, 19-10-2012 a las 22:37 +0200, Michał Górny escribió: > On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:01:57 +0200 > Pacho Ramos wrote: > > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > > warning? > > In my opinion, descriptions should not be sentences. Sentences > in English not only need to end with a dot but also require a subject > and a predicate. That makes them unnecessarily long, filled with > useless information like repeated package name and obvious 'is', > at least. > > So, rephrasing the example Alexandre pasted, consider: > > x11-libs/qt-core - The Qt toolkit is a comprehensive C++ application >development framework. > > vs. > > x11-libs/qt-core - A comprehensive C++ application development framework > > Which one is better, in your opinion? > Well, I my case I would prefer second sentence... but it would still end with a dot. But if it sounds rare for you, no problem. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Sentences in English not only need to end with a dot but also require a > subject > and a predicate. Another repoman check? And don't forget the topic for Japanese.
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
Il 19/10/2012 21:36, Thomas Sachau ha scritto: Pacho Ramos schrieb: Hello At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman warning? Thanks for your opinions I dont know any such requirement from english nor german and neither do i see any benefit from adding a dot at the end of the DESCRIPTION variable. So if you want to have a unified behaviour all over the tree, i would request all descriptions to be without the final dot. +1
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:01:57 +0200 Pacho Ramos wrote: > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > warning? In my opinion, descriptions should not be sentences. Sentences in English not only need to end with a dot but also require a subject and a predicate. That makes them unnecessarily long, filled with useless information like repeated package name and obvious 'is', at least. So, rephrasing the example Alexandre pasted, consider: x11-libs/qt-core - The Qt toolkit is a comprehensive C++ application development framework. vs. x11-libs/qt-core - A comprehensive C++ application development framework Which one is better, in your opinion? -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 21:01 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would
> you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman
> warning?
>
> Thanks for your opinions
In English, it is also mandatory to end sentences in "."
But package DESCRIPTION strings are almost never complete sentences; in
the vast majority of cases, they are just titles that are noun phrases
grammatically, and therefore do not need a "."
For example, nobody would call descriptions of gcc ("The GNU Compiler
Collection"), libX11 ("X.Org X11 library"), or polkit ("Policy framework
for controlling privileges for system-wide services") complete English
sentences. For one thing, they don't have verbs.
Some packages do have DESCRIPTIONs that are complete sentences
grammatically: x11-libs/qt, for example, has "The Qt toolkit is a
comprehensive C++ application development framework." (and it ends in a
".") So for those cases, the ebuild maintainers could append "." if they
want to. But even then, I would not make something this trivial into a
requirement.
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
Pacho Ramos schrieb: > Hello > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > warning? > > Thanks for your opinions > I dont know any such requirement from english nor german and neither do i see any benefit from adding a dot at the end of the DESCRIPTION variable. So if you want to have a unified behaviour all over the tree, i would request all descriptions to be without the final dot. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Hello > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > warning? > > Thanks for your opinions > I don't really see the advantage or upside. English requires sentences end in a dot as well. -- Doug Goldstein
[gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."
Hello At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman warning? Thanks for your opinions signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
