RFC: fix summary text for lots of packages

[Jeff Spaleta]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa at gmail.com> wrote:
> True. It isn't immediately clear to me if that is a bad thing though.

Well that's the underlying question what is the summary really meant
to convey.  Is it meant to differentiate? or is it meant to aggregate?
 At  duplicate summaries just trying to be more fine-grained "groups."
 At some point however, people have to be shown the choice among peers
for any functionality. If the summary doesn't attempt to differentiate
at all, then you'll have to expose differentiation at yet another
level of detail...so people can comparison shop.  Is the package name
enough of a differentiator?

Grocery store analogy time.

I have a terrible headache and I'm on vacation in Hungary  for the
first time and I go to the store looking for a society approved mind
altering chemical substance to relieve my distress.  I walk into the
store see a clerk and what do I ask them? Do I ask them details or do
I ask them "where is the headache medicine."

Once I get to the Aisle where the first-aid stuff collectively sits I
see 14 different brands of medicine, none of which I've heard of
before because I'm in a foreign territory. I might see a brandname I
know, but I've never before associated that brand with headache pills.
"Uncle Ben's" branded extra strength gel-caps really doesn't call to
me. So which one do I pick? Do I really care? Are they all just
equally usable variants of "headache medicine" to me?  If I do care,
like I have a specific allergic reaction that I need to avoid... I'd
have to pick up the bottle and try to read the details...in
Hungarian...which will ultimately result in my death because I will
make the wrong choice unless I happen to have a translator who can
help me read the fine print.

PackageKit is the store
the Package groups are the Aisle
The package name is the brand of headache medince
The package description is the fine print on the bottle

What's the summary?

-jef