Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds
ballombe at debian.org
Tue Aug 15 21:10:16 UTC 2017
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 07:49:55PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Also what you are saying ("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") doesnt really makes sense:
> if a package shows up as unreproducible somewhere, it's not reproducible
> according to our definition!
Again, reproducible means that it _can_ be reproduced. As long as a well-know
process allows to reproduce the package, it is reproducible.
What you define is a different concept that deserve a different name.
Bill. <ballombe at debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
More information about the Reproducible-builds