[pkg-firebird-general] Bug#652140: Bug#652140: firebird2.5-superclassic: typo in package description

[Damyan Ivanov]

-=| marius adrian popa, 15.12.2011 09:07:22 +0200 |=-
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Daniel Hartwig <mandyke at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Package: firebird2.5-superclassic
> > Version: 2.5.1.26351.ds4-2+b1
> > Severity: minor
> >
> > The first line of the package description would like some 
> > s/Supec/Super/
> >
> > io:~$ apt-cache show firebird2.5-superclassic | grep ^Desc
> > Description: Firebird SupecClassic Server - an RDBMS based on InterBase 6.0 code

Thanks! I have fixed this locally and will push/upload soon (in 
preparation of a 2.5.2 snapsnot package).

> Also the description field should be changed
> 
> Firebird is an open source SQL standard compliant relational database
> management system

The current text is taken right from www.firebirdsql.org :) I'd prefer 
to follow the site when describing FB in a few sentences. No need to 
improve something they already seem to accept as good.

> ps: we are not a fork only anymore the code base is highly rewritten
> and firebird 3.0 is quite far away from ib 6.0 code base :)

And, I still think that 'based on IB 6.0' is true, especially for 
2.5.x. Just take a look at debian/copyright and see how much of the 
code is still from InterBase. Even in 3.0 most of the files are 
copyright Inprise (~840, of which ~500 have no contribution outside 
Inprise; from almost 2000 files total).

> maybe we can add the wording
> 
> originally based on InterBase 6.0 code

Now it is:

 Description: Firebird Super Server - an RDBMS based on InterBase 6.0 code

Adding "originally" would make it too long, and won't add additional 
information. "based on X" already says that it has started as X and 
then turned to something else.

Of course, there is nothing wrong in dropping InterBase from the 
description, fork or not. I thought that having it will give the users 
some background about Firebird and not make the impression that it is 
a newly born project (and therefore lacking many features the "real" 
RDBMS have). And, I have nothing better to offer instead. "True 
universal open source database" (from the website) seems like 
advertising and may not match the real situation (most of users are on 
Windows, developers have no access to "exotic" hardware). "All-purpose 
database" sounds closer to the point, but I still don't know how to 
compile it in the description.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-firebird-general/attachments/20111220/3ae138ee/attachment.pgp>