8167
Comment:
|
8202
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 80: | Line 80: |
* Alexander Schmehl (["Tolimar"]) |
Many packages in Debian have low quality descriptions. This affects the general quality of the distribution by making searching difficult.
The idea (first mentioned by Lars Wirzenius in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/07/msg01095.html) is to make a general package descriptions review campaign
What needs to be done
All packages descriptions for packages in unstable (maybe only in main) should be reviewed. A large number of common "mistakes" can easily be spotted. Please have a look at the "Things to look for" section.
For descriptions which are identified as problematic, an updated proposal will be elaborated.
Organization
To ensure maximal quality, all reviews and updates should be made by at least two people. Native English speakers are of course appreciated.
A Web-based interface has been developed and is available at http://zorglub.diwi.org/pkg-descriptions
Such an interface will (hopefully) allow easy centralization of the current reviews, and easy generation of reports.
Here is how the work will be organized:
- Reviewers claim sections on this page to avoid conflicts
- Reviewers use the interface to spot descriptions that need to be fixed
- A proposal is elaborated.
When we have finished, a repository of the proposed descriptions with attached patches will be made available and an announcement will be sent out.
What we can hope is that maintainers will use as much as possible this patches repository and fix their descriptions. After a few weeks, we'll start submitting bugs with these patches. (as it will represent a mass bug filing, we'll coordinate with qa).
Things to look for
In general, anything that does not help or confuse the user is probably worth fixing
Obvious stuff
- Typos
- Incorrect English
Other
Descriptions that do not really describe what the package does
The description must include enough details for the user to know what it is about. If the package is related to another one (foo-data, for example), the package does not have to repeat what foo is... but it has to explain how it relates to foo anyway.
Hyperbolae
Stuff like "this package is the best in the world"
- Stuff not interesting for the user
- "foo was written by me "
- bar was written while its author had a broken leg"
- generally speaking, anything too "personal"
Incorrect tone
Many package descriptions are "joking", or are even scornful. This should definitely be avoided.
Policy violations. See
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Description
Controversial stuff
- Technical details about the implementation of the program
A consensus might be that some details are OK/needed, but that should remain reasonable.
Generally speaking, these details should rather be at the end of the descriptions, after describing what the package is/does, or at least not be too intrusive.
- Worse: "Foo is a Python tool which uses libbar. It can frobnicate baz"
- Better: "Foo is a Python tool to frobnicate baz. It uses libbar."
Volunteers
If you want to help, please register your name here and/or drop a mail to zorglub _a_t_ diwi _d_o_t_ org
- Clément Stenac
Anthony ?DeRobertis
- Margarita Manterola (["Marga"])
- Christine Spang
- Alexander Schmehl (["Tolimar"])
- many others (hopefully)
How to use the web interface
First of all, you need to pick up a login. No authentication is provided, its only use is to know who made reviews.
You then need to select a section to begin working on. Section with many packages are split up.
You are then taken to the main review page. For each package, you can enter a status "Ok", or "Needs fixing" and a comment. (Two review fields are provided).
If you want to enter aditionnal comments, work on a proposal, or comment on the current proposal, you need to go tho the package details page by clicking the package name.
Work repartition
Top priority should be given to desktop applications (gnome, kde, x11, ...) Lowest priority sections are libs, devel, ... and generally speaking stuff users don't often search for.
Section |
Nb packages |
1st reviewer |
Status |
2nd reviewer |
Status |
admin |
704 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
base |
151 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
comm |
102 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/admin |
8 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/comm |
3 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/devel |
52 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/doc |
15 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/games |
20 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/graphics |
6 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/interpreters |
2 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/kde |
1 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/libdevel |
4 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/libs |
34 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/mail |
14 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/math |
3 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/misc |
12 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/net |
15 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/otherosfs |
22 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/perl |
2 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/python |
1 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/science |
2 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/sound |
8 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/text |
22 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/utils |
10 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/web |
11 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
contrib/x11 |
12 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
devel |
1331 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
doc |
925 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
editors |
220 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
electronics |
63 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
embedded |
9 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
games |
675 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
gnome |
324 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
graphics |
349 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
hamradio |
75 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
interpreters |
459 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
kde |
278 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
libdevel |
1449 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
libs |
1791 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
339 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
|
math |
245 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
misc |
436 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
net |
1128 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
news |
37 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/admin |
5 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/comm |
4 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/devel |
15 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/doc |
48 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/editors |
2 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/electronics |
3 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/games |
34 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/graphics |
18 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/hamradio |
2 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/libdevel |
5 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/libs |
8 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/mail |
3 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/math |
9 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/misc |
10 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/net |
13 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/news |
6 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/otherosfs |
4 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/python |
5 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/science |
16 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/sound |
7 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/tex |
8 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/text |
14 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/utils |
6 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/web |
4 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
non-free/x11 |
26 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
oldlibs |
104 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
otherosfs |
98 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
perl |
873 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
python |
707 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
science |
143 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
shells |
32 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
sound |
438 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
tex |
151 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
text |
559 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
utils |
752 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
web |
877 |
|
0% |
|
0% |
x11 |
737 |
|
0% |
|
0% |