From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mike Gerwitz <mtg@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#33844: Rename ghc-pandoc to pandoc
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:03:06 -0500
Message-ID: <87wo87e22d.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <9251b0f558ee90be48420e76d7c4d326@riseup.net>
 <878skpacih.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <20200226102314.GE12956@E5400>
 <87pne0q0wb.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CAJ3okZ2-Mz=Bh6dbg7BEcH54Vc0RMRDfCOkqTJzP=cW4S2wAJg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
 micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47229)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <mtg@gnu.org>) id 1j7Xog-0001X4-Ni
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:04:03 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAJ3okZ2-Mz=Bh6dbg7BEcH54Vc0RMRDfCOkqTJzP=cW4S2wAJg@mail.gmail.com>
 (zimoun's message of "Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:10:15 +0100")
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: <https://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-mx.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel"
 <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Cc: Guix Devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>, 33844@debbugs.gnu.org

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 14:10:15 +0100, zimoun wrote:
> Well, your comment is pointing: a) that the description is badly
> written and b) the 'relevance' score is too rough.

[...]

> The real problem is not the non-obvious name (ghc-pandoc instead of
> simply pandoc) but it is: a) some descriptions are badly written and
> b) the 'relevance' scoring function is not enough "smart" to detect
> them.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this.

=2D-=20
Mike Gerwitz

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=AcLV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--