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.