[rb-general] Change front page definition

Holger Levsen holger at layer-acht.org
Tue Apr 23 15:28:59 CEST 2019

On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 02:17:53PM -0400, David A. Wheeler wrote:
> > It might be non-obvious from where those copies are coming from, or IOW
> > that the hashes of these sources are part of the build instructions.
> I don't think that should be specified in the definition.
> It shouldn't matter how you got copies, as long as you have them.
> Having hashes of sources in the build instructions can be a useful implementation
> approach, but I don't think those should be required either (if you have the actual
> sources, there's no particular reason to require the hashes as well).

agreed to all of that. but then I wouldnt mention 'copies'... (because
else it implies all those questions mentioned above.)

> Fair point.  I think removing that word "both" is good enough.


> New version of the summary motivation is:
> Reproducible builds help counter unintentional errors and malicious builds.

I think I'd like to see a full patch... else it's much harder to

> Fair point, and it's probably unnecessary to mention either "set" or "sets".
> Also, I don't think the project is developing all the tools that could be useful.


> How about this as a summary description of the project?:
> The reproducible builds project is developing tools and recommended
> software development practices to enable all builds to be reproducible.
> Again, the goal is to maximize clarity for newcomers.

again, I think I'd like to see a full patch... :)

& thanks as well!


       PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-general/attachments/20190423/ca31aa05/attachment.sig>

More information about the rb-general mailing list