Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (339 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-buildservice] Build Service Status
  • From: "Dr. Peter Poeml" <poeml@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 00:21:36 +0100
  • Message-id: <20080305232136.GA21293@xxxxxxx>
On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 12:08:46 +0100, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Wednesday 05 March 2008 21:51, Dr. Peter Poeml wrote:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 09:40:26PM +0100, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:

I would suggest to use <origin/> instead of <maintainedin/>.

We actually considered "origin" in the last buildservice meeting,
however it was felt that it is too misleading, souding too much like
upstream, which isn't the point in those case. Thus, we settled for
maintained_in.

For me "origin" doesn't sound like "upstream". It's a copy which clearly has
an origin. If this is origin is the upstream project, a maintained version or
something completely different isn't implied and also isn't really relevant.

"maintainedin" is a bad choice for two reasons: First it doesn't fit
language-wise because it isn't a noun, so trying to use that in context will
create awkward sentences (see for example the wiki page where it's already
used), and second it implies that its meaning has something to do with
maintenance, which actually isn't true. For the Factory use case it might
coincidentally be true, that the project you copy from is the one where
packages are usually maintained, but in general this isn't the case. The
functionality is about copying or branching projects and packages, not if and
how these projects and packages are maintained.

Good points, Cornelius.

We might want to use "ancestor" for the location where the package was
taken from, and "origin" for the original location where it stems from
(considering a series of moves, links, submits, or whatever actions
which move stuff around).

How about that?

Peter
--
"WARNING: This bug is visible to non-employees. Please be respectful!"

SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Research & Development
< Previous Next >
Follow Ups