On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 at 12:58, Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 03 Oct 2024 at 15:54:16 +0000, James Addison wrote: > > I'd like to request an upload of the src:meson-python package, in > > particular to close bug #1076806, a reproducibility bug related to > > documentation copyright notices > > Done, but I'm curious why making this particular package reproducible > was a high enough priority for you that it needed to be called out > specifically? I don't normally prioritize uploading low-impact fixes like > this one, on the basis that each upload needs testing to make sure it > isn't going to regress other packages, and minor fixes can be included > next time there is a more important update to be done.
Thank you for the upload - in this case, I'd been iterating through the list of Debian 'package sets'[1] displayed on the Reproducible Builds test result website, searching for any packages that could be encouraged along the path to building reproducibly. Core/popular package sets seem like good places to look for opportunities to improve Debian reproducibility for many users, although sometimes with associated risk because of the number of systems potentially affected. Although it doesn't appear there any more, I believe meson-python was listed in the 'build-essential-depends' set. After noticing that it was pending upload, and had been for a reasonable duration of time, I asked around in the RB IRC channel about a potential NMU (that I understand are generally considered not ideal, but sometimes acceptable), and then after some feedback there, decided that it might make more sense to ask directly on the bugreport and mailing list. If I'd felt that this was one of a category of similar possible uploads, I would have attempted to describe/list the relevant packages - in this case the package was a one-off. [1] - https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/unstable/amd64/index_pkg_sets.html
