[rb-general] GNU coding standards discussion
ludo at gnu.org
Fri Dec 2 15:43:36 CET 2016
Hello Ian! :-)
Ian Jackson <ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk> skribis:
> It seems that rather than simply writing a general encouragement to
> accept patches, the gnu-proc-disc list (and particularly rms) think it
> desirable to try to give a definition of reproducibility.
Ximin raised valid concerns about the definition. Fundamentally, I
think it’s hard to come up with a definition that covers every important
aspect while not being too specific to particular techniques and tools.
Yet there’s consensus among distros about what “reproducible” means, and
each distro knows how to check for reproducibility with its own tools,
which is the important part to me.
I think what matters is that the recommendation that RMS suggested at
the very beginning ends up in the Standards.
More information about the rb-general