<!entity % commondata SYSTEM "common.ent" > %commondata;
<!-- CVS revision of this document -->
- <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.186 $">
+ <!entity cvs-rev "$Revision: 1.187 $">
<!-- if you are translating this document, please notate the CVS
revision of the developers reference here -->
<!--
<sect id="bpp-debian-control">
<heading>Best practices for <file>debian/control</file></heading>
<p>
-The following practices supplement the <url
- id="&url-debian-policy;ch-miscellaneous.html#s-descriptions"
- name="Policy on package descriptions">.</p>
+The following practices are relevant to the
+<file>debian/control</file> file. They supplement the <url
+id="&url-debian-policy;ch-miscellaneous.html#s-descriptions"
+name="Policy on package descriptions">.
+ <p>
+The description of the package, as defined by the corresponding field
+in the <file>control</file> file, contains both the package synopsis
+and the long description for the package.
+
+
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-desc-basics">
+ <heading>General guidelines for package descriptions</heading>
+ <p>
+The package description should be written for the average likely user,
+the average person who will use and benefit from the package. For
+instance, development packages are for developers, and can be
+technical in their language. More general-purpose applications, such
+as editors, should be written for a less technical user.
+ <p>
+Our review of package descriptions lead us to conclude that most
+package descriptions are technical, that is, are not written to make
+sense for non-technical users. Unless your package really is only for
+technical users, this is a problem.
+ <p>
+How do you write for non-technical users? Avoid jargon. Avoid
+referring to other applications or frameworks that the user might not
+be familiar with — "GNOME" or "KDE" is fine, but "GTK+" is
+probably not. Try not to assume any knowledge at all. If you must
+use technical terms, introduce them.
+ <p>
+References to the names of any other software packages, protocol names,
+standards, or specifications should use their canonical forms, if one
+exists. For example, use "X Window System", "X11", or "X"; not "X
+Windows", "X-Windows", or "X Window". Use "GTK+", not "GTK" or "gtk".
+Use "GNOME", not "Gnome". Use "PostScript", not "Postscript" or
+"postscript".
+
+
+ <sect1 id="bpp-pkg-synopsis">
+ <heading>The package synopsis, or short description</heading>
+ <p>
+The synopsis line (the short description) should be concise. It
+must not repeat the package's name (this is policy).
+ <p>
+It's a good idea to think of the synopsis as an appositive clause, not
+a full sentence. An appositive clause is defined in WordNet as a
+grammatical relation between a word and a noun phrase that follows,
+e.g., "Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer". The appositive clause here is
+"red-nosed reindeer". Since the synopsis is a clause, rather than a
+full sentence, we recommend that it neither start with a capital nor
+end with a full stop (period). Imagine that the synopsis is combined
+with the package name in the following way:
+
+<example>The <var>package-name</var> is a <var>synopsis</var>.</example>
+ <p>
+If the package name is an acronym, it is sometimes useful to expand
+the acronym. For instance, the synopsis for <package>vim</package> is
+"Vi IMproved - enhanced vi editor".
+
<sect1 id="bpp-pkg-desc">
- <heading>Writing useful descriptions</heading>
+ <heading>The long description</heading>
<p>
-The description of the package (as defined by the corresponding field
-in the <file>control</file> file) is the primary information available
-to the user about a package before they install it. It should provide
-all the required information to let the user decide whether to install
-the package.
+The long description is the primary information available to the user
+about a package before they install it. It should provide all the
+information needed to let the user decide whether to install the
+package. Assume that the user has already read the package synopsis.
<p>
-The following practices supplement the <url name="Policy on the descriptions
-of packages" id="&url-debian-policy;ch-miscellaneous.html#s-descriptions">.
+The long description should consist of full and complete sentences.
+It is recommended to use two spaces after full stops in sentences. We
+realize this is an American style rather than European, but it is
+additionally helpful in creating visual space in fixed-width fonts.
<p>
-The synopsis line (the short description) should primarily be concise.
-You may capitalize the first letter for aesthetics. It is customary to
-make the synopsis an appositive clause (not a full sentence) in which
-case there's no need to put a full stop (period) at the end.
+The first paragraph of the long description should answer the
+following questions: what does the package do? what task does it help
+the user accomplish? It is important to describe this in a
+non-technical way, unless of course the audience for the package is
+necessarily technical.
<p>
-The long description should, however, always consist of full sentences.
+The following paragraphs should answer the following questions: Why do
+I as a user need this package? What other features does the package
+have? What outstanding features and deficiencies are there compared
+to other packages (e.g., "if you need X, use Y instead")? Is this
+package related to other packages in some way that is not handled by
+the package manager (e.g., "this is the client to the foo server")?
<p>
-Since the first user impression is based on the description, be
-careful to avoid spelling and grammar mistakes. Ensure that you
+Be careful to avoid spelling and grammar mistakes. Ensure that you
spell-check it. <prgn>ispell</prgn> has a special <tt>-g</tt> option
for <file>debian/control</file> files:
<example>ispell -d american -g debian/control</example>
-If you want someone to proofread the description that you
-intend to use you may ask on &email-debian-l10n-english;.
</sect1>
<sect1 id="bpp-upstream-info">
~ianmdlvl / developers-reference.git / commitdiff