Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:33:39AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > > Then you've submitted the ITP report incorrectly. That field > > should be the intended 'Description' field of the package. > > Where's that written? I don't mean to be objectionable, but no such > requirement is listed in the developer's reference: > http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage
It's in the instructions for WNPP, and in the form asked by 'reportbug'. If your request type is ITP (1) or RFP (4) you are asked for a short description and then for some information about the package: Please briefly describe this package; this should be an appropriate short description for the eventual package: > A DESCRIPTION <URL:http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/> > I think it's more important to submit an ITP early to avoid > duplicate work than to spend more time perfecting the package > description. It needn't be perfect, but it should be the prospective packager's intended description of the package. This is important to allow meaningful discussion about the package before further work is done on it; the synopsis and description are a large part of the filter someone will use to decide whether to take a closer look at the ITP. -- \ “I went to the museum where they had all the heads and arms | `\ from the statues that are in all the other museums.” —Steven | _o__) Wright | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]