Quoting Jérémy Bobbio (2016-02-04 12:23:05)
> 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.

since we probably never want to record the explicitly non-transitive build
dependencies in the .buildinfo (because those are already recorded elsewhere),
adding "transitive" to the name is probably not necessary. On IRC I agreed with
Holger that using your original proposal and calling it Installed-Build-Depends
should be enough. I think even an uneducated reader would quickly figure out
that this field is not listing the direct but also the indirect (transitive)

Thanks and sorry for bikeshedding!

cheers, josch

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to