Please review the draft for April's report

[Vagrant Cascadian]

On 2026-05-07, Manuel Jacob wrote:
> On 07/05/2026 19.04, Manuel Jacob wrote:
>> On 05/05/2026 21.20, Chris Lamb wrote:
>>> Please review the draft for April's Reproducible Builds report:
>>>
>>>    https://reproducible-builds.org/reports/2026-04/?draft
>>>
>>> … or, via the Git repository itself:
>>>
>>>    https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reproducible-website/ 
>>> blob/master/_reports/2026-04.md
>> 
>> Hi Chris,
>> 
>> I am a bit confused that https://reproducible-builds.org/ 
>> reports/2026-04/?draft#upstream-patches mostly contains what I would 
>> call downstream patches to the Debian package. For most of the patches, 
>> I couldn’t find that they were submitted upstream. What about renaming 
>> the section to just “Patches”?
>
> To clarify, some of the linked patches add patches against upstream 
> code, so they could be called upstream patches (even if they are not 
> submitted upstream), but some add only post-processing to the e.g. 
> Debian package.

I have often shared concerns over this discrepancy, though have stopped
grumbling about it quietly...

I do like your simple proposal to just refer to it as "Patches"! :)


>> Unrelated to the previous paragraph: The post lists some documentation 
>> changes that I made which I wouldn’t have considered noteworthy, such as 
>> changing the tense of the sentence or adding a missing word. My first 
>> thought was that the summary might be automatically generated. 
>> Regardless of this, do you think it’s important to list all changes or 
>> should I remove some minor changes listed in the post?

Yeah, noteworthiness is sometimes a tricky thing to guage... showing
more involvement from more people, even if only for "trivial" things,
sometimes is an indicator of greater overall involvement in other subtle
ways, which might be helpful.

I do not always feel some of my own submissions are noteworthy, but am
inclined to underreport and have been encouraged to share more of what I
am doing, so ... *shrug* :)


live well,
  vagrant
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.reproducible-builds.org/pipermail/rb-general/attachments/20260507/2d7972b1/attachment.sig>