[Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

[Johannes Schauer]

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/reproducible-builds/attachments/20160204/d919b1aa/attachment.sig>