[Git][reproducible-builds/reproducible-presentations][master] 10 years r-b cccamp talk: wip, still too many pages

Holger Levsen (@holger) gitlab at salsa.debian.org
Fri Aug 18 14:39:41 UTC 2023



Holger Levsen pushed to branch master at Reproducible Builds / reproducible-presentations


Commits:
6483c363 by Holger Levsen at 2023-08-18T16:39:29+02:00
10 years r-b cccamp talk: wip, still too many pages

Signed-off-by: Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org>

- - - - -


2 changed files:

- 2023-08-19-R-B-the-first-10-years/index.html
- 2023-08-19-R-B-the-first-10-years/todo


Changes:

=====================================
2023-08-19-R-B-the-first-10-years/index.html
=====================================
@@ -866,21 +866,14 @@ Warpforge.
 	</section>
 
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
-        <h3>Summary of reproducibility of various projects</h3>
-	<ul>
-   	<p>Many projects support reproducible builds by now, but it's unclear what that means, how it's enforced and how users can know and be confident.</p>
-	<p class="fragment">I call it reproducible in theory or in CI.</p>
-	<p class="fragment">This is a <em>massive</em> success! This was thought impossible not long ago.</p>
-	</ul>
+        <h3>Short overviews of various projects</h3>
      </section>
 
-
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
 	<h3>results for Debian unstable, until 20230804</h3>
 	<img src="images/stats_pkg_state_20230804.png">
 	</section>
 
-
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
 	<h3>Debian trixie, 20230804</h3>
 	<img src="images/stats_pkg_state_trixie_20230804.png">
@@ -934,6 +927,23 @@ Warpforge.
 	</ul>
       </section>
 
+      <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
+        <h3>100% reproducible is a politcal decision and nothing technical</h3>
+     	<ul>
+    	<li>Thus we need to change <code>debian-policy</code>!</li>
+	</ul> 
+</section>
+
+      <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
+        <h3>100% reproduciby in theory is not enough, by far.</h3>
+     	<ul>
+    	<li>Thus we need rebuilders.</li>
+	<li class="fragment">Thus we need a working <code>snapshot.debian.org</code> service.</li>
+	<li class="fragment">And then we need reproducible transparency logs and logic what to do when....</li>
+	<li class="fragment">And then we also need binary transparency logs (also because we haven't reached 100% yet).</li>
+	<li class="fragment">The above is true for all projects, not just Debian.</li>
+	</ul> 
+      </section>
 
 
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
@@ -973,25 +983,18 @@ Arch Linux is 86.4% reproducible with 1701 bad and 10849 good packages.
      </section>
 
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
-        <h3>Summary of reproducibility of various projects, summarized again</h3>
+        <h3>Summary of various projects</h3>
 	<ul>
-   	<li>Many projects support reproducible builds by now, but it's unclear what that means, how it's enforced and how users can know and be confident. I call it reproducible in theory or in CI.</li>
-	<li>This is a huge success.</li>
-	<li class="fragment">Next: make this accessable and usable for everyone.</li>
+   	<p>Many projects support reproducible builds by now, but it's unclear what that means, how it's enforced and how users can know and be confident.</p>
+	<p class="fragment">I call it reproducible in theory or in CI.</p>
+	<p class="fragment">This is a <em>massive</em> success! This was thought impossible not long ago.</p>
 	</ul>
      </section>
 
-      <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
-        <img src="images/ccc2014-13.png">
-      </section>
 
 
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
-        <h3>Theory vs Praxis</h3>
-	<ul>
-	<li>I used to say: 96% reproducibility is a lie. Or rather: 96% are CI results.</li>
-	<li class="fragment">Now I like to say: in theory, we are done. In practice, we have shown that reproducible builds can be done in theory.</li>
-	</ul>
+        <img src="images/ccc2014-13.png">
       </section>
 
 
@@ -999,14 +1002,22 @@ Arch Linux is 86.4% reproducible with 1701 bad and 10849 good packages.
       <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
         <h3>Theory vs Praxis</h3>
 	<ul>
-	<li>Rebuilding / reproducing Debian in practice also requires a working snapshot.debian.org service and we don't have this.</li>
+	<li>I used to say: 96% reproducibility is a lie. Or rather: 96% are CI results.</li>
+	<li class="fragment">Now I like to say: in theory, we are done. In practice, we have shown that reproducible builds can be done in theory.</li>
 	<li class="fragment">Then we also need many rebuilders and we need to store the results somewhere and we need to define criterias how tools should treat that data...</li>
-	<li class="fragment">Those missing 5% are <b>one</b> reason why we are not done yet.<li>
 	<li class="fragment">Those missing 5% are crucial however, or at least 1% of them. For Debian, 1% means 300 softwares...</li>
 	
 	</ul>
 	</section>
 
+      <section data-background="images/Fisty-sprayed-Stencil_Neonpink.png" data-background-size="10%" data-background-position="93% 9%" data-transition="none">
+        <h3>Summary</h3>
+	<ul>
+   	<li>Many projects support reproducible builds in theory today, but it's unclear what that means in practice and how users can know and be confident. I call it reproducible in theory or in CI.</li>
+	<li>This is a huge success.</li>
+	<li class="fragment">Next: make this accessable and usable for everyone.</li>
+	</ul>
+     </section>
 
 
 


=====================================
2023-08-19-R-B-the-first-10-years/todo
=====================================
@@ -1,15 +1,9 @@
 last story points:
 		theory vs praxis:
-			"theory" is easy (it was not! and it was a lot of work)
-			binary transparency would be useful to bridge that gap
-				and still needed with 100% r-b
 			getting 100% of the software to build reproducible is only maybe half the work needed...
 	debian next milestones
-		realistically, 100% reproducible is a politcal decision and nothing technical.
 		commitment from Debian project to do it
 			-> policy changes
-		working snapshot.d.o service
-			-> requirement for rebuilder
 	list 10 biggest blockers?
 	archlinux next milestones
 		I dunno, I'm not even using Arch Linux ;)
@@ -23,5 +17,5 @@ new todo:
 	nice übergänge
 	$ grep -c 'section da' index.html 
 		should not return 74 but 42 or rather less
-		now at 65 :/
+		now at 67 :/
 



View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-presentations/-/commit/6483c3632844350b3361da87706050bcb6bb469c

-- 
View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-presentations/-/commit/6483c3632844350b3361da87706050bcb6bb469c
You're receiving this email because of your account on salsa.debian.org.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-commits/attachments/20230818/5f739058/attachment.htm>


More information about the rb-commits mailing list