Improving Package descriptions

[Christian PERRIER]

Quoting Stefano Zacchiroli (leader at debian.org):

> proposed by Lars Wirzenius.  I've no idea about the current state of the
> initiatives, but I'm confident participants would be happy to get some
> helping hands.


Stalled.. :-)

Indeed we review package descriptions when we review debconf
templates. I am personnally initiating most of these reviews, in
general during the early stages of the release cycle.

The order I choose is processing packages that have debconf templates,
ranked by popcon score, and then review both templates and package
descriptions.

This is probably not the best way to review package descriptions
because the many packages that don't have debconf templates don't get
any review. Well, my personal goal being to make user promting
consistent (and using correct English), I follow *this* goal.

But, obviously, anybody is free to start reviews with other
goal...such as reviewing package descriptions by popcon score.

Please note that this is a giant task. We currently have between 1 and
1.5 persons doing review coordination and 2-3 people max doing the
reviews (including the tireless Justin B. Rye). A higher number of
reviews would exhaust....and, in the end, demotivated those volunteers.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/attachments/20101017/7ac92be7/attachment.pgp>