On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 01:00:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Adrian Bunk <b...@debian.org> writes: > > > Future policy versions might change this definition, but whatever latest > > policy states has to be the definition used by both packages and the > > reproducible builds team. > > > Another example is that a package that is reproducible according to the > > policy definition must not show up as non-reproducible in tracker/DDPO > > based on results from the reproducible infrastructure. > > This in absolutely no way constrains the reproducible build team from > working on raising the bar in the future.
Adrian is speaking of DDPO, not of reproducible-builds.org. reproducible-builds.org website woud still be free to list other requirements, and DDPO could even display both results. I am still concerned that there will be no reliable way for maintainers to check whether a package is reproducible according to policy before uploading it to the archive. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.
