Two questions about build-path reproducibility in Debian

[John Gilmore]

Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> > > to make it easier to debug other issues, although deprioritizing them
> > > makes sense, given buildd.debian.org now normalizes them.

James Addison via rb-general <rb-general at lists.reproducible-builds.org> wrote:
> Ok, thank you both.  A number of these bugs are currently recorded at severity
> level 'normal'; unless told not to, I'll spend some time to double-check their
> details and - assuming all looks OK - will bulk downgrade them to 'wishlist'
> severity a week or so from now.

I may be confused about this.  These bug reports are that a package cannot
be reproducibly built because its output binary depends on the directory in which
it was built?

Why would these become "wishlist" bugs as opposed to actual reproducibility bugs
that deserve fixing, just because one server at Debian no longer invokes this
bug because it always uses the same build directory?

If an end user can't download a source package (into any directory on
any machine), and build it into the same exact binary as the one that Debian
ships, this is not a "wishlist" idea for some future enhancement.  This
is a real issue that prevents the code from being reproducible.

How am I confused?

	John