Holger Levsen: > I know that *you* have grasped the concept of transitive build depends very > well, but I'm pretty sure that 97% of the DD population have no idea what > transitive build depends are, especially compared to build-depends or > alternative build-depends. And even 70% were too many.
Sorry Holger but we are introducing new concepts. So sure, 97% of the DD population have no idea what we are talking about, but that's fine. We have to educate them about .buildinfo file and what the various fields mean. We have to aim at field names that are as unambigious as possible to avoid laying traps on users. For the particular case of “Installed-Transitive-Build-Depends”, it's easy enough to explain “these are the name and version of all packages which made building these binary packages possible”. Math geeks can get a more formal definition. “Built-Using” is already taken with a very precise meaning (and is there for license-compliance reasons), but that would be the simpliest way to sum up the short statement above. Given these are .buildinfo files, I would be bold and suggest just “Using”. I need to state that I care more about not drowning ourselves in bike shedding than finding the perfect name. -- Lunar .''`. lu...@debian.org : :Ⓐ : # apt-get install anarchism `. `'` `-
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducibleemail@example.com http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds