+ <section id="golang-static-linking">
+ <!-- Check if this still matches the view of the security team -->
+ <title>Go based packages</title>
+ <para>
+ The Debian infrastructure currently doesn't properly enable
+ rebuilding packages that statically link parts of other
+ packages on a large scale.
Until buster that hasn't been a
+ problem in practice, but with the growth of the Go ecosystem
+ it means that Go based packages will be covered by limited
+ security support until the infrastructure is improved to
+ deal with them maintainably.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ If updates for Go <quote>libaries</quote> are warranted,
+ they can only come via regular point releases, which may be
+ slow in arriving.
+ </para>
+ </section>
+ If updates for Go <quote>libaries</quote> are warranted,
Missing R in libRaries! (But why in quotes? Should that be
<emphasis>?)
+ they can only come via regular point releases, which may be
+ slow in arriving.
+ </para>
+ </section>
+ <title>Go based packages</title>
On 27-05-2021 21:54, Justin B Rye wrote:
+ If updates for Go <quote>libaries</quote> are warranted,
Missing R in libRaries! (But why in quotes? Should that be
<emphasis>?)
These are not libraries in the c-library sense. Can you elaborate when
you'd expect <emphasis> and when <quotes>? To me <quotes> feels natural, <emphasis>, I don't know what it would mean to me in this place.
Paul Gevers wrote:
+ <title>Go based packages</title>
maybe this should have hyphen:
+ <title>Go-based packages</title>
Paul Gevers wrote:
On 27-05-2021 21:54, Justin B Rye wrote:
+ If updates for Go <quote>libaries</quote> are warranted,
Missing R in libRaries! (But why in quotes? Should that be
<emphasis>?)
These are not libraries in the c-library sense. Can you elaborate when you'd expect <emphasis> and when <quotes>? To me <quotes> feels natural, <emphasis>, I don't know what it would mean to me in this place.
Well, Perl modules aren't quite libraries in the C-library sense,
either, but we still treat them as library packages. If these ones
will have package names beginning with lib-, I'd call them libraries
without scarequotes. If they're libraries needed only to build
software, rather than at runtime, should we perhaps be saying:
+ If updates are warranted for Go development libraries,
Justin B Rye wrote:
Paul Gevers wrote:
On 27-05-2021 21:54, Justin B Rye wrote:
+ If updates for Go <quote>libaries</quote> are warranted,
Missing R in libRaries! (But why in quotes? Should that be
<emphasis>?)
These are not libraries in the c-library sense. Can you elaborate when
you'd expect <emphasis> and when <quotes>? To me <quotes> feels natural, >>> <emphasis>, I don't know what it would mean to me in this place.
Well, Perl modules aren't quite libraries in the C-library sense,
either, but we still treat them as library packages. If these ones
will have package names beginning with lib-, I'd call them libraries
without scarequotes. If they're libraries needed only to build
software, rather than at runtime, should we perhaps be saying:
+ If updates are warranted for Go development libraries,
Hi Justin,
It might be useful for us non-native English speakers if you could
elaborate on the appropriate use of (scare)quotes[1].
For what it's worth, in this particular case I also believe they are not needed or could even twist the meaning, though I can't quite explain
why.
[1] at one point we should probably collect all of these in a style
guide somewhere. Maybe just a .md file in git would be sufficient as a
start?
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 355 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 04:22:09 |
Calls: | 7,656 |
Calls today: | 8 |
Files: | 12,812 |
Messages: | 5,700,752 |