Re: wording: "reverse dependence" vs "depender"

[Michael Lustfield <michael@lustfield.net>]

On Jan 1, 2017 4:37 PM, "Ben Finney" <bignose@debian.org> wrote:

Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:

> Oi you lot!

Wassaaaap!?

> I wonder, would it be better if we switched to using the word
> "depender" in place of "reverse dependency"?

I don't know a simple term in English that carries that meaning.

To me, “depender” feel like a neologism and does not make me confident
the reader would know what is meant. I vote −1 to that term.

I imagine any non-English speaker would significantly oppose creating new slang for this. I had to scratch my head when I read the subject wondering if it was a typo for defender.

I can't, at this moment, think of a decent alternative.