I would love to expand WalletScrutiny to Linux but how?
leo at LeoWandersleb.de
Sat Aug 1 16:31:58 UTC 2020
> Could you describe this phenomenon and interaction pattern with
> Android developers in more detail? I would particularly interested in
> what incentives, thought patterns or obstacles you believe you are
> encountering here.
For a big part I think there is ignorance to the concept of reproducibility,
even among developers. It just doesn't occur to them that the release manager
under distress might do terrible things.
At WalletScrutiny I try to get the reproducible wallets on board to promote the
concept. They should advertise the fact but kind of don't yet.
Wallets that are open source but not reproducible (if buildable at all) I poke
with GitHub issues every now and then and there are some few that show phases of
interest to make their builds reproducible but it usually fizzles out. Not sure,
why. I keep poking every other month but they usually have other urgent things.
At the wallet where I am the release manager, the CEO/CTO did not give it
sufficient priority to investigate it for a year of me pushing for it but once I
got to look into it, it turned out to be almost reproducible already. Only much
later did we have to add disorderfs to the build instructions.
> I ask because a big part of the purpose of "Reproducible Builds"
> existing as a community/project is education, ie. to reach out to other
> communities so we can work together towards common goals.
> Understanding what other communities' incentives are is therefore
> highly instructive in working out how we can collaborate, and I don't
> believe I have a firm grasp on the Android perspective.
Native Android is mostly reproducible out of the box but those cross-platform
frameworks and stuff developed in C++ are more tricky to get right.
More information about the rb-general