I've often quietly wondered about maintenance of our "reproducible-notes" issues, and was recently reminded by:
Remove -ffile-prefix-map tags from packages that do now build https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-notes/-/commit/25e7569e394fb4cf882c30690d26d8da1d8decc4 I had been using this issue to track progress, and still see some value in a package that was affected by an issue, even though it currently builds reproducibly now... But I also run into many issues where historically a package had an issue and no longer does; which sometimes the issue starts to get cluttered or makes me wonder if some of them were misflagged. Yet I often look at the fixed packages for an issue to find potential solutions for other packages that are still failing. Similarly for removing bug reports once an issue is archived; sometimes links to these bug reports contain fixes that are useful beyond that one specific package fix... But there is also a signal to noise ratio issue in our notes tracking with so many old fixed issues, so I can also see value in doing this sort of housecleaning work... So not really sure what to think; I see value cleaning and maintaining current status yet also see value in keeping history a little easier to reach than grepping through git logs. Curious what others think about maintaining the reproducible-notes repository over the long-term... live well, vagrant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Reproducible-builds mailing list Reproducible-builds@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
