From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] gnu: Some cleanup based on lint checkers.
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 00:06:41 +0200
Message-ID: <87tx2rreha.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87tx2uxcxk.fsf@member.fsf.org>
	<20141024160537.GA11876@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48026)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Xi9Tk-0008Fm-CG
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 18:06:38 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Xi9Td-0006RG-8v
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 18:06:32 -0400
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:40547)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1Xi9Td-0006R9-1Y
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2014 18:06:25 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20141024160537.GA11876@debian.eduroam.u-bordeaux.fr> (Andreas
	Enge's message of "Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:05:37 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:

> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:19:03AM -0500, Eric Bavier wrote:
>> 2. Many descriptions begin with the package name in lowercase form,
>> which triggers a warning about the description beginning with a
>> lowercase letter.  In this patch I capitalised the package name if I
>> could find a reference to the capital form on the package's home-page
>> somewhere.  Many packages are quite insistent that the package always be
>> referenced by the lowercase name, and I'm not sure how the description
>> would be reworded, or whether it really needs to be.  We could add an
>> exception to the description-starts-with-a-capital-letter rule for when
>> the package name is the first word.
>
> Personally I would capitalise; we are not bound by upstream wishes to use
> incorrect language.

I would keep the =E2=80=9Cofficial name=E2=80=9D as is, even if it=E2=80=99=
s lower-case.

Ludo=E2=80=99.