Bill Allombert: > 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. >
Did nobody mention $ reprotest --dont-vary build_path auto xxx.dsc -- schroot unstable-amd64-sbuild yet? X -- GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
