More Detailed Package Descriptions

Yoda · 2008-08-06 01:51:10

This is purely my opinion, obviously, but I believe that the Arch site would benefit greatly from a more detailed explanation of packages. Compare these two package details:

http://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/i686/mlocate/

http://packages.debian.org/sid/mlocate

I'm not implying that Debian is better, or anything of the sort (I enjoy Arch much more), but I do believe they offer a generally-superior detailing of packages. The simplicity of the "dependencies" and "required by" sections could be kept in place, as well as the short description of the package when searched for, but in my opinion, Arch's website would be that much more useful by including something so simple. And yes, I realize I could simply use Debian's package search, but I enjoy the centralization of using Arch's package search, if only it was a bit more detailed.

Am I the only one who feels this way, or what?

Allan · 2008-08-06 01:55:24

Or you could click on the upstream url in the package details page. Going straight to the source is always a good thing.

neotuli · 2008-08-06 02:15:47

I don't really see the need for long verbose explanations either. One of the things that attracted me to arch was the straight-to-the-point-ness of it, and I sort of group that in with one-liner package descriptions.

Dusty · 2008-08-06 02:23:16

I don't think I've ever read an arch linux package description, to be honest... I always use the home pages instead.

The problem with long descriptions is they get out of date and its more for each maintainer to try to keep track of with each release.

Dusty

toofishes · 2008-08-06 02:40:21

Yeah, if I need more of a description I'll go to the URL listed in pacman -Qi output or on the webpage.

And with descriptions like that, just think about the number of false positives you will get on -Ss searches. For example, let's try "pacman -Ss binary" because I'm looking for some sort of binary viewer (ooo look, biew shows up! just what I need). That returns a healthy 12 results on Arch which is easy enough to sort though. On Debian, that same search would return probably about 1500 packages becuase of the completely unnecessary use of the word 'binary' in the mlocate (and other packages') description.

ozar · 2008-08-06 02:48:15

Allan wrote:

Or you could click on the upstream url in the package details page. Going straight to the source is always a good thing.

Ditto what he said... when I need more info, I go straight to the source.

k2t0f12d · 2008-08-06 03:06:08

A short phrased description is good enough. When I was making build scripts for DIY I was cutting and pasting from upstream url right into my description field. What the hell was I doing that for?

EDIT: Hey, isn't the name of the Arch maintainer for mlocate the same as the guy from StarCraft.

Last edited by k2t0f12d (2008-08-06 03:07:47)

neotuli · 2008-08-06 04:01:58

k2t0f12d wrote:

EDIT: Hey, isn't the name of the Arch maintainer for mlocate the same as the guy from StarCraft.

Heh, yeah and he's studying to become a rocket scientist
http://www.archlinux.org/developers/#JamesR

robmaloy · 2008-08-06 06:45:50

k2t0f12d wrote:

A short phrased description is good enough. When I was making build scripts for DIY I was cutting and pasting from upstream url right into my description field. What the hell was I doing that for?
EDIT: Hey, isn't the name of the Arch maintainer for mlocate the same as the guy from StarCraft.

i believe the starcraft guy was named "Raynor". but phonetically its (almost) the same

iphitus · 2008-08-06 11:12:39

robmaloy wrote:

k2t0f12d wrote:
A short phrased description is good enough. When I was making build scripts for DIY I was cutting and pasting from upstream url right into my description field. What the hell was I doing that for?
EDIT: Hey, isn't the name of the Arch maintainer for mlocate the same as the guy from StarCraft.
i believe the starcraft guy was named "Raynor". but phonetically its (almost) the same

People have a habit of spelling mine Raynor anyway... who knows why...

Last edited by iphitus (2008-08-06 11:13:55)

neotuli · 2008-08-06 13:34:52

Not to derail things further, but it looks like he's changed his avatar to james raynor...

Cerebral · 2008-08-06 13:45:44

... holy crap, I never noticed that, and I used to play a lot of StarCraft.

sand_man · 2008-08-06 23:31:43

I like the Arch one better. Even the layout of the page looks better. It even loaded up faster than the debian one

whargoul · 2008-08-06 23:48:28

I have always wondered if it could be possible to have a long description as optional. Like if you search for 'binary' only short package description would be used. But when you want to have a longer description of 'mlocate' you could just type pacman -Sii mlocate.

Just a thought.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-08-06 01:51:10

More Detailed Package Descriptions

#2 2008-08-06 01:55:24

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#3 2008-08-06 02:15:47

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#4 2008-08-06 02:23:16

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#5 2008-08-06 02:40:21

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#6 2008-08-06 02:48:15

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#7 2008-08-06 03:06:08

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#8 2008-08-06 04:01:58

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#9 2008-08-06 06:45:50

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#10 2008-08-06 11:12:39

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#11 2008-08-06 13:34:52

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#12 2008-08-06 13:45:44

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#13 2008-08-06 23:31:43

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

#14 2008-08-06 23:48:28

Re: More Detailed Package Descriptions

Board footer