Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 11:23:33 -0600 From: Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: suggestion for pkgdb from ports-mgmt/portupgrade: add more explanation Message-ID: <20110903172333.GA89227@guilt.hydra> In-Reply-To: <4E61F2AF.8000608@FreeBSD.org> References: <201109011333.p81DX2sN081775@fire.js.berklix.net> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1109021657410.1576@abbf.6qbyyneqvnyhc> <4E61BB11.9070007@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1109030142530.35982@abbf.6qbyyneqvnyhc> <4E61F2AF.8000608@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 11:26:07AM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: >=20 > I'd support a motion to replace "dependency" by "requisite" in port and > package management tools to remove the ambiguity. I think that's a terrible idea. If we are going to change the terms used for such things, we should angle more toward an E-Prime approach to phrasing in such cases. Don't misunderstand -- I think that trying to write or speak in E-Prime all the time is an even worse idea. There are contexts where it's a great idea, though, and this is one of them. Using terms like "dependency" and "requisite" in this context tends toward tortuous sentence construction and other Byzantine absurdities. If we're going to change the phrasing, go with this like "Foo depends on bar," and "Bar requires foo." Aruing over whether it should be "Foo is a dependency of bar," or "Foo is a requisite of bar," utterly misses the most important point here: both of them suck. By the way, "dependency" in simplest terms just means that the thing in question is dependent or subordinate upon something else. That, to me, means that "stale dependency" says the dependency information for the dependent port is stale. That doesn't sound wrong at all. --=20 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] --wac7ysb48OaltWcw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk5iYpUACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKWDBgCgwPmr07rLx+legTiJudZf/4ZP sAcAoJ7dWlw2hVm5em3gvmVBZqHPyxXk =c0Ld -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wac7ysb48OaltWcw--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110903172333.GA89227>