[rb-general] buildinfo filename convention

[Arnout Engelen]

Hi,

We currently provide some conflicting advice on .buildinfo filename conventions.

Let's consider as an example an architecture-independent package
called 'foo' of which version 0.1.2 was built on machine 'yinka'.

This buildinfo file could be called:
- foo_0.1.2_yinka-1533833907.buildinfo (following
https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/BuildinfoFiles,
'${SOURCE}_${DEBIAN_VERSION}_${STRING}.buildinfo')
- foo_all_0.1.2.buildinfo (following the text on https://buildinfo.debian.net/)
- foo_0.1.2_all.buildinfo (following the actual uploads on
https://buildinfo.debian.net/)

One of the reasons to share .buildinfo files is to check whether
different builds produced the same result. For that reason it might be
convenient to allow files to be named such that buildinfo files for
different builds of the same package can be put in 1 directory, by
choosing different filenames for different builds.

For convenience we could stay as close to the actual code and suggest
as convention:

  ${SOURCE}_${DEBIAN_VERSION}_${ARCHITECTURE}_${STRING}.buildinfo

... where the '_${STRING}' part is allowed to disambiguate different
uploads, but is optional.

This way 'foo_0.1.2_all.buildinfo' and
'foo_0.1.2_all_yinka-1533833907.buildinfo' would both be acceptable
filenames.

Any thoughts? If no-one has objections I'll update the wiki and the
text at https://buildinfo.debian.net/ to consistently recommend this
convention.


Kind regards,

Arnout