[arch-general] Upstream urls and package descriptions

[Gaetan Bisson]

[2013-08-01 18:02:38 +0200] Karol Blazewicz:
> The same upstream url can be used by many packages and standardizing
> would make it a bit easier to find which packages need to have the
> upstream url updated.

That is just not feasible. As you noticed yourself: sometimes, a www
prefix and/or slash suffix to a URL are required, sometimes not. Certain
upstream projects have several websites; others use a language different
from English on their main page, but have an English subpage available
(what page would you link to then?), etc.

> I don't know if maintainers should write package descriptions or
> should they just take them from upstream, but IMHO e.g.
> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/i686/kdeplasma-addons-wallpapers-virus/
> : 'Description:    Virus'
> has to go.

For this and everything else that follows, please open separate bug
reports or feature requests in our tracker - except for:

> Some language-related packages use the same description for all of them e.g.
> xpdf-korean - Encoding information to use specific character sets in
> Xpdf; does not include fonts
> vim-spell-af - Language files for Vim spell checking

That's fine to me (obviously, I maintain them): they're split packages
that all do the same thing and I do not think the redundant description
causes any confusion of what package is meant for what language...

> Should language files always have a description that says which
> language do they represent or are package names enough?

Just calm down. Anything that makes sense is fine. :)

-- 
Gaetan