From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12F613877A for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:10:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CB7B4E0B17; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-f182.google.com (mail-ig0-f182.google.com [209.85.213.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF43AE09C3 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:10:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ig0-f182.google.com with SMTP id c1so7858656igq.15 for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 07:10:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fmP5GLJ0QQ2DKc5VUZSYoUg3Fh9ZVaow92tF43RZ4x4=; b=go5EB5ShoZLxGiV/m0BEaJLVFgrPo3TNVFj+mGUByBIwsDGggeXMYRhWssvLdDUSDl DMpy8j6xZkK9fDpUvq269yKlFLvoCY79SbxA5ONiU7gIHBp2B0uWzxcsjmPuu/IPU78B w1ajcY5QW7KxCQ2GvKSx/kbkx/vwcu77Ku9eOACA7kp+IDsvLPFCUgEfIR61tUgg2M9q DTmc9DXdoQ6B6cOl5JiEd4/QRvUrdBysvqaAinUgfty3pZF8hQkY0AlANc6IAMlTa011 3TQRGUkAWnc/gBsEuGpqX2LruEGVvQiUGaz6cH0akrlrkCfu9cLgzzfByAx4JpbXRX96 98oQ== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.43.107.133 with SMTP id dy5mr32411898icc.14.1408371036011; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 07:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: yngwin@gmail.com Received: by 10.64.232.38 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 07:10:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140812204614.1b9be84d@pomiot.lan> References: <20140810152211.2cc5ae94@sf> <20140812014820.GA3086@linux1> <20140812204614.1b9be84d@pomiot.lan> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 22:10:35 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: zdVfjQjGFxTLLeyiaK_YW8gqJls Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings From: Ben de Groot To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 00b8f605-ba9c-4066-be2f-79f4d84193ae X-Archives-Hash: c150d016804b1a9331d926adad5f3e06 On 13 August 2014 02:46, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > Dnia 2014-08-11, o godz. 20:48:20 > William Hubbs napisa=C5=82(a): >> > got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: >> > DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character >> >> Why is this a QA warning in the first place? > > Because it is a common mistake, and having the warning in-place should > help people avoid repeating it. This is correct. >> I don't recall a policy mandating that descriptions can't end with '.'. = I >> asked our QA lead about it and was told that he didn't recall that we >> have an official policy about it either. Also, the devmanual never >> mentions any such requirement. > > I don't know if and where it is documented but that's what I was taught > when I started contributing to Gentoo, and it pretty much follows > the common sense. DESCRIPTION is supposed to be short and descriptive. > So you do an elliptical sentence (if I got the right translation), > and that doesn't end with a dot. Again, this is what I was taught as well. It may have been an undocumented rule, but it has been around for as long as I can remember. It also makes linguistic sense, and as an English teacher it always irks me when I see this mistake. > If you have any fair reason to not follow this, please speak of it. > Otherwise, this is pure bikeshed and waste of time. This thread already > took much more time than fixing your packages if repoman complained > about them. Amen! >> If someone can point me to something I'm missing, let me know. >> Otherwise, I think the warning should be removed. > > Even if there were no written-down policy, why would it be removed? > What is the benefit of removing the check that resulted in many fixes > already? Do you want to revert the removals afterwards? Or do you want > to introduce new packages which use '.' there? I completely support this argument. The warning is correct and should remain in place. --=20 Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer