Re: [openstack-dev] Enforcing correct short and long description of packages we produce

2015-03-08 Thread Steve Martinelli
Okay, how's it fixed? Just updating setup.cfg for each project.
Packaging is pretty much a blackbox to me (and I don't think I'm the only 
one with
that view). Letting us know about a problem is great, but a way to resolve 
this
would be even better.

Thanks,
Steve Martinelli
Keystone Core

Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org wrote on 03/08/2015 06:51:38 PM:

 From: Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org
 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) 
 openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 Date: 03/08/2015 06:57 PM
 Subject: [openstack-dev] Enforcing correct short and long 
 description of packages we produce
 
 Sorry guys, for writing it this way, but really... I'm sick and tired of
 the absence of relevant short and long description on almost every
 component we produce. Look at this one:
 
 https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslo.policy
 
 Is it so hard to produce 3 lines of long description? Can't we have a
 rule which enforces no library can graduate with such a poor 
description?
 
 No, that's not *only* about me having to write a correct package
 description, otherwise risking to be pointed out as careless by other
 Debian developers. It's also about new comers to OpenStack. Let's
 imagine an OpenStack newbie. Do you think it's normal that he needs to
 search for hours in the docs, and sometimes even in the code, just to
 figure out what the hell a given Oslo lib does?
 
 Do you think it makes anyone willing to use a lib, when one has to
 search for the definition of RBAC? (hint: it's looking like this means
 Role Based Access Control, but I didn't find out yet what's the
 difference between RBAC and an ACL...)
 
 Really, I don't wish to appear as a moron, but I've been crying about
 this for at least 2 or 3 years, and I see no progress. I think it's more
 than time to enforce a rule using a gate test or something to prevent
 this to happen again.
 
 Cheers,
 
 Thomas Goirand (zigo)
 
 
__
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe: 
openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
 
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


[openstack-dev] Enforcing correct short and long description of packages we produce

2015-03-08 Thread Thomas Goirand
Sorry guys, for writing it this way, but really... I'm sick and tired of
the absence of relevant short and long description on almost every
component we produce. Look at this one:

https://pypi.python.org/pypi/oslo.policy

Is it so hard to produce 3 lines of long description? Can't we have a
rule which enforces no library can graduate with such a poor description?

No, that's not *only* about me having to write a correct package
description, otherwise risking to be pointed out as careless by other
Debian developers. It's also about new comers to OpenStack. Let's
imagine an OpenStack newbie. Do you think it's normal that he needs to
search for hours in the docs, and sometimes even in the code, just to
figure out what the hell a given Oslo lib does?

Do you think it makes anyone willing to use a lib, when one has to
search for the definition of RBAC? (hint: it's looking like this means
Role Based Access Control, but I didn't find out yet what's the
difference between RBAC and an ACL...)

Really, I don't wish to appear as a moron, but I've been crying about
this for at least 2 or 3 years, and I see no progress. I think it's more
than time to enforce a rule using a gate test or something to prevent
this to happen again.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev