Moving towards a deb-buildinfo(5) Format 1.0

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

On Sat, 2016-11-12 at 19:04:53 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've noticed several things with the
> current .buildinfo format, even after the cleanup pre-merge, that
> I'd like to fix or change so that we can hopefully reach Format 1.0.

Ok, let's see what's the current status:

> Some of the issues, that bother me:
> 
> * .buildinfo files are not currently signed

Fixed. Pending debsign (from devscipts) doing the same.

> * .buildinfo filename

Fixed. Now they use the same format as .changes files.

> * dpkg-genbuildinfo injects itself into debian/files

I think this is fine for now, we can always revisit later on. In any
case this is an implementation detail not affecting the .buildinfo
format.

> * .buildinfo files are not generated when creating source-only uploads

Fixed. Now always generated.

> * .buildinfo has some issues when including .dsc information
> 
>   Only the .dsc file is referenced not all of its contents, it might
>   be better to match .changes logic here. Also the “source”
>   pseudo-architecture does not get added to the Architecture field.
>   I'll just do at least the latter, I'm open for discussion on the
>   former.

Partially fixed. The source is now included in the Architecture
field. The inclusion is not recursive, but I think this is fine,
and we should be able to add them if we deem it important in the
future w/o breaking the format.

> * Some of the environment variables seem superfluous or leaks

Ignored. This is valuable information, so it seems fine. Also new
variables are alos tracked now.

> I'll probably do some of the fixes already and bump Format to 0.2
> and after the discussion settles we can perhaps do a 0.3, and see how
> it goes, and iterate until it looks good, at which point we'd declare
> it 1.0, ideally before the freeze. :)

So given the above, I've queued a minimal change declaring the format
1.0 for dpkg 1.18.23 or .24, please shout if you see any additional
problem or blocker.

Thanks,
Guillem