Re: RFR: release notes update on golang security support
An1drei POPESCU wrote:
> 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].
The idea of scarequotes is that we're not asserting that it's a
library, we're in effect quoting indefinite/imaginary sources that
would *call* it a library. Depending on context this can have
overtones anywhere between "we really might as well all call it this,
even if it isn't technically accurate" and "would you believe some
people are actually dumb enough to call it *this*?"
In other words, it's very like "so-called libraries", except without
such a clear implication that using that label is bad.
> 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.
I'm still not sure I know what sort of packages it's talking about.
If it's things like golang-dbus-dev, the description calls it a
library and I don't see any reason for scepticism, though we might
specifically call it a development library.
> [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?
Well, I've put some of my frequent recommendations in
"http://jbr.me.uk/linux/esl.html";, but I didn't have anything about
this.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: