Hi, 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) depends. Thanks and sorry for bikeshedding! cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
