Hello,

thanks for review.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:23:27AM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
>Hello,
>
>just a quick comment on the descriptions. It would be good to write full
>sentences, for instance:
>
>On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 01:31:12AM +0100, Tomáš Čech wrote:
>> +     "Set of generic media players allowing to open video files through emotion. Useful only for emotion library based applications.")
>
>"Emotion Generic Players provides/consists of/is a set of generic ...
>It is useful only for ...".

I agree that sentences may be better, I only suck at it. I'll try
to improvide it  or I can accept any recommendations in the meantime.

>I think it would also be good to expand a bit where possible, and to introduce
>the word "enlightenment" in each of these packages (by replacing "EFL" with
>"Enlightenment Foundation Libraries",

I do agree that use of "Enlightenment Foundation Libraries" instead of
"EFL" could make it more enjoyable to read, but we could expand also
Gimp toolkit, Tool Command Language, ...

Those who would need such these packages will know and it won't help
to others anyway.

Synopsis of efl package will show you "Enlightenment Foundation Libraries".

>for instance, or adding a sentence like
>"It is part of the Enlightenment desktop environment").

Enlightenment is using the same libraries (they were developed for
Enlightenment) but the libraries are much more generic. It's like
relationship between Qt and KDE, only with reversed history order.

>Maybe call the file enlightenment.scm?

I believe efl.scm is more accurate as the packages there would be EFL
based but not necessarily Enlightenment related.