> On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 10:59:19PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 02:52:20PM -0500, Steve Langasek scribbled: > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 02:44:17PM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De > > > Vitis wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 09:30:31PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > Description : The pmk project aims to be an alternative > > > > > to GNU/autoconf (configure scripts). > > > > > > > > Description field is inappropriate, use something like: > > > > > > > Description: A GNU/autoconf alternative. > > > > Try "an alternative to GNU autoconf" or "a substitute for GNU > > > autoconf", to avoid confusion with Debian's alternatives system. > > It's not quite a substitute, as it won't reuse autoconf's configs > > etc. How about "A tool for configuring software source similar to > > GNU Autoconf"? >
No, actually, that is ambiguous. Read literally, it means that only software source similar to GNU Autoconf can be configured with this tool. You really mean: A tool, similar to GNU Autoconf, for configuring software Admittedly this is ugly. It may also be really inaccurate. I have no idea of how similar to GNU Autoconf the tool is. I hope that it is not very similar at all. Perhaps: A tool to configure software (GNU Autoconf also has this purpose) Jim Penny