It's undoubtedly a tasteful idea to include a comment in the metadata for a package. OTOH, I don't think we've really landed on the natural order of what a package "is" yet (see Metacello and Monticello beat-down threads.)
> Why the low
> interest? 

I dunno, let's compose an expression that installs everything that we know we can install from squeaksource. Now let's compose an expression that compares the number of classes without class comments to the number of classes with class comments.

Why the low interest?

Maybe you're onto something: maybe the cost of documenting a package is lower than the cost of documenting all of the classes in it...

On Sep 2, 2010, at 7:56 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean at clipperadams.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> Hannes Hirzel-2 wrote:
>> 
>> I found the proposal by Bernhard Pieber and Ralph Johnson to introduce
>> package comments?
>> 
> +100
> 
> This seems like an *awesome* idea, but no one commented.  Why the low
> interest?  It would be great to have a place to summarize the purpose of the
> package and give starting points into the code e.g. how to start the GUI.
> 
> BTW, the original discussion referenced was at
> http://forum.world.st/SMSqueakMapAdminView-was-Maui-1-2-release-1-td2020021.html#a2047596
> 
> I started an issue at http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7558
> 
> Sean
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Documentation-What-about-package-comments-tp2062634p2525049.html
> Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>