retitle 452905 [pkgreport.cgi] revise explanation of no maintainer packages
(and therefore, likely non-existant)
thanks
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:54:20 -0800
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, A. Costa wrote:
> > Compromise kludge, (with the reservation that I believe the best fix
> > would be to keep track of all package names past and present, and
> > offer only valid links): print fuzzy info, and explain how it's
> > fuzzy. Example:
>
> So you desire that the "Please do not report new bugs against this
> package" bit be expanded.
The entire text of a page should be logically consistent, presenting
fuzzy data as such, and therefore containing no inaccuracies whatever
the circumstance.
Factual statements should be true, while hypothetical statements and
objects should be properly qualified. Meaning should be clear without
rereading or deduction. Existential phrasings like:
...this package.
...the 'foo' package page.
...no record of the 'foo' package.
etc.
...are invalid, though, like a stopped analog watch, sometimes true by
chance.
After revision the text may well be shorter, hence 's/expanded/revised/'.
HTH & Ho ho ho!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
