From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Synchronizing synopses with the Womb
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:17:33 +0200
Message-ID: <878v4h8736.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56257)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1USV3M-0000WB-Tr
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:17:50 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1USV3I-0004p5-5y
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:17:48 -0400
Received: from [2a01:e0b:1:123:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:271e] (port=38082
	helo=xanadu.aquilenet.fr) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1USV3I-0004m4-0Q
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:17:44 -0400
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Karl Berry <karl@freefriends.org>
Cc: bug-guix@gnu.org

Hello Karl,

I=E2=80=99ve finally synchronized synopses of GNU packages found in the
distribution with those found in the Womb, thanks to the tools Nikita
added to Guix some time ago.

I ended up [0] using all the synopses from the Womb (they=E2=80=99re clear,
concise, and objective, whereas ours often repeated the package name,
and sometimes included subjective wording), except in two cases:

  gnu/packages/nano.scm:29:3: nano: proposed synopsis: "Free improved repla=
cement for the pico text editor"
  gnu/packages/gdbm.scm:26:3: gdbm: proposed synopsis: "Hash library compat=
ible with traditional dbm"

For Nano, I=E2=80=99m not sure it makes sense to mention Pico (Pico wasn=E2=
=80=99t free,
right?); instead we have "A small, user-friendly console text editor".

For gdbm, =E2=80=9Chash library=E2=80=9D seems misleading, and I think the =
word
=E2=80=9Cdatabase=E2=80=9D must appear; I would suggest: =E2=80=9CKey/value=
 database library=E2=80=9D.

WDYT?

The tool for comparing synopses is now in the repo [1], and run from
=E2=80=98dist-hook=E2=80=99.  It just reports differences.

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.

[0] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=3Df50d2669e3e62436=
5221cc81918ba55fdce94107
[1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=3D0e993428ce5ebd34=
d3bd9cb200140ffb2a5ef232