On 21.11.2008 16:43, Richard Hughes wrote:

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 14:33 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:

The packaging guidelines have a single sentence on package
summaries:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description

"The summary should be a short and concise description of the
package"
Sorry to keep going on about this, but this is the contents of the
email I'm about to send to ~50 package maintainers.


To all those that got that mail: if you want to know which of you
packages have problems check the headers of the mails you got. You'll
find something like this:



[...] Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id
3so259690qwe.47 for <rss2email-owner@fedoraproject.org>; Sat, 22 Nov
2008 07:43:09 -0800 (PST)
[...]


E.g. in this case it was rss2email that needs work.

@Richard, do you really expect that those people with more than (say) 5
packages check all those 419 lines in the files you attached to look
which of their packages need to be changed (reminder: some people own
even more than 200 packages iirc)?


Cu
knurd


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Sat, 2008-11-22 at 17:34 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> E.g. in this case it was rss2email that needs work.
>
> @Richard, do you really expect that those people with more than (say)
> 5
> packages check all those 419 lines in the files you attached to look
> which of their packages need to be changed (reminder: some people own
> even more than 200 packages iirc)?

No, I didn't think of this case, apologies. I'll send an email following
up from the original with a mapping from FAS usernames to packages.

Thanks,

Richard.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list