Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!news.spin.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Holger Levsen Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.java Subject: Re: [Reproducible-builds] Usefulness of periodic reproducible builds e-mails Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 03:00:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-java-request@lists.debian.org Sat Oct 3 00:57:20 2015 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.7 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -6.1 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.16.0-0.bpo.4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1649396.o9X7VJaf6W"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18729 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/201510030256.26807.holger@layer-acht.org Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 85 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: "debian-java@lists.debian.org" X-Original-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 02:56:22 +0200 X-Original-Message-ID: <201510030256.26807.holger@layer-acht.org> X-Original-References: <20150928230515.CADF11ED52@jenkins.debian.net> <201509291708.21156.holger@layer-acht.org> <560AAC37.8080104@apache.org> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.java:8415 --nextPart1649396.o9X7VJaf6W Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Emmanuel, On Dienstag, 29. September 2015, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > I agree and am wondering if we should actually do this, and limit > > (maintainer) notifications to unstable? What do you think? > Well, if I understood your "this graph is a lie" properly in your talks, > I think the reproducibility in testing isn't very interesting for now, > until the tool chain matures and we have really reproducible packages in > unstable. At this point the testing notifications will have much more > sense. Nope, I don't think you understood my "this graph is a lie" properly ;-) Th= e=20 graphs are "lies", because they don't show sid and stretch but (sid+our rep= o)=20 and (stretch+our repo). There is a different reason why I think notifications for testing are "usel= ess=20 noise" (or "not so interesting information", if you prefer): in Debian, we = fix=20 things in sid and these fixes migrate to testing (=3Dstretch), so once a pa= ckage=20 has become reproducible in sid it should also become reproducible in testin= g,=20 once that version migrates to testing.=20 If this doesnt happen it's almost certainly a bug in our test framework, bu= t=20 not a reproducibility issue in the package. And if the package ftbfs in=20 testing, this is very sad, but IMO not appropriate to send a "reproducible= =20 builds project" notification for it - such problems should be detected=20 elsewhere. It's nice if we gather that data, and we should also manually fi= le=20 bugs from that data, but I dont think we should generate automated=20 notifications because as I tried to explain, if a package is fixed in sid, = the=20 fix will migrate to testing eventually. Thus we only really need to care ab= out=20 sid and testing will be good "automatically". > So yes, limiting maintainer notifications to unstable would be a good ide= a. I've limited notifications to unstable and experimental now, and also impro= ved=20 the code a bit that only one mail per is sent per source package in all=20 suites, no matter how many status changes it had. But we should still impro= ve=20 it to allow individual subscriptions, and probably this is best done via=20 tracker.d.o - does anybody know how to achieve that? cheers, Holger --nextPart1649396.o9X7VJaf6W Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUAVg8nugkauFYGmqocAQpwRxAAmAE08l3CRfHhXk9D4bqBSOcArNZogTFc FLnqVR3yiQpzlvMeBUE7n4W5fCg6IFfgLGtFQ3RjJHCv++esKFZRJMGDpzrG43cP yWlw+68bfQ3aMUO5fCqOsINUYlG1i/D0At0oUuPQL4aJhrKieOJyZjB+22lKrm1p kofY6dQICOerB17EP7uJO0/CTKkQw7r66k8cRFDY/puWw5DgZJeP1D6p+h2njVaH ojxkCiTn2wbmBU3HTu9f4vxicB2ZNgr91bSv2wSHUvuHUFdvCxu4RRY6/Xel5ZcE ZEvYNzalo/nRhGuDXwhyyyntkG6pR8SuLjmoLY6F4X+1koEU4c3w/jO6zIw3uJE/ ur7g1gnbZhXGLIOsKWOpEmZJUDCwfTJX47Obw8NMYZgS2pWmCYyZoNGJbpI3+AK1 hjdWu3pp5dxTnTi/qjY0kfKXEQG3I6kMbODjH3kYiu9B9BqHjg/+zDU267TWH2YO F9J4woVBMq7wb3hLpWLjHFi0m/lv79N4/A9NFqUsuLhmbJeUXd1MdkYj9Ak6xYwn yxZ3B84PI9Cl4RW2CCDCYnWPdErsrvarDfn0rW64zhmNKs9VK23lwvmjCESiL10H TxjRGEcOZuOHLFga743hHLz5x/dsfDbmhSmxP77dklN+WdAMF4oAJj1qNa2MTIkQ hupKwdeX3y0= =0OW4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1649396.o9X7VJaf6W--