From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms5.migadu.com with LMTPS id eIwwORsWp2KTswAAbAwnHQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 12:49:00 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id ECa5OBsWp2JMUgEAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 12:48:59 +0200 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCC46F040 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 12:48:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35374 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o0hcw-0006cO-Lt for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 06:48:58 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56392) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o0hcW-0006bM-PE for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 06:48:33 -0400 Received: from laurent.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:110:4::f00:19]:58434) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o0hcT-0002J4-Vl for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 06:48:32 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a]) by laurent.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id iaoS270044UW6Th01aoSxZ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 12:48:26 +0200 Message-ID: <4b2fc26e7ed4bd76f64d9b70eff70902c7da5d2a.camel@telenet.be> Subject: Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy From: Maxime Devos To: Giovanni Biscuolo , guix-devel@gnu.org Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 12:48:21 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87sfo87vpw.fsf@xelera.eu> References: <878rq22syb.fsf@elephly.net> <874k0qi5g1.fsf@xelera.eu> <225108d8b5a3c5e900009b38d65137ff3915d9ed.camel@telenet.be> <87sfo87vpw.fsf@xelera.eu> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-L+sIwSxEoSUGxfTAOAWl" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22; t=1655117306; bh=SJ57arEeISA9AsZli3sLoWnWqjSGQPrunyqFohIBLrI=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=KFAaoJizWygXOeE0YpfYD7fP/Zi8TcxnqFdX0m5N1PHF0mOqjT/9zShPIXXk9k1vV PwNFZZL/Y5mnIIppYHGi2Z6ngv9q0l6O+9IzMX9f0Rf+JqFRQCS0htUxrBTD4OeQL8 gPGXeGDC7IAWQn6Q8VtqgcAN35ICjsQt4Im23B7+AxUcbpDsiZw+BcCQEia2k0gQ9W MY1eC1hU+KTCcTn5sP5miousKU3pPAU0QrSz+vL8hKVQOCzEPZdW4hU7uYi+CWhXaC lxJV0ARkfJF0dez0FXowYbt73XN+8r8/ePGw9CmpD2zzKWz3NdUJbpBlBDrUCz/cLc Rn2hKnRlYVttg== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:110:4::f00:19; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=laurent.telenet-ops.be X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-To: larch@yhetil.org X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1655117339; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=SJ57arEeISA9AsZli3sLoWnWqjSGQPrunyqFohIBLrI=; b=IkXkGBsKCwcxmbteobGcfi9gC/a13RW3n6NKGBdLulVgJX7791ZnSX1WLsQpy2XlVyeHY+ KU9teTQe51V6qj8a4oYXQBIFw+7NVa7rfrHv72gnoMptyt2hUNlTTcZS/3qF/PFqFK+zmY yBNFdABU5HlCeqb9OL4MQtfjBcr8KP3Fq1Cg9arQXVLNoemIl6Mdci1EoHSDjLdl8bT2Dt /NFI36DdKMMFg6LzhPhZagPI4qPbr0uV1dBj8EBZKCaHMpohNmCb7Q/GtsAfxVXEZs6kzJ C9hta110JSkQKs6Dga8BnpwbuT+cg6k2nrbnjmVDXWmVMZfdOtsuE6KkpMhT5g== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1655117339; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=ThtBB51wKRbMa1wyjUM7zOfvEg0KObWFlnYW2jyPmR9hrhweiMSLWDpoBx5OOV8h56KnKc 6SSAhi7GiOVxge4hNrQPQYCguAvL8okGa8B8GrC1a4X7ZaOHUsrls7L6Fx2kM353D/rjSJ 17NWouapaCX+WbWS26NSQ2+3tMgIfFpaR4ECD7dHWfv55DTUgZxqMEz7ruPOJdDMlcqRhC jF0mf0BQGgymN7TEM4EvMNnWpN2JTPw9MMB9TUPaDHxs3QG0A0T+NRZYR+TPm5ny2J+fXI PBrqJ82sm+dP7wHhhpsZP0O7D4EAQhYEaZt4w9j+X08JOP6ITeUw9dx4PkRb1g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r22 header.b=KFAaoJiz; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -7.89 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r22 header.b=KFAaoJiz; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: BCC46F040 X-Spam-Score: -7.89 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: WB/V8xxYkGEu --=-L+sIwSxEoSUGxfTAOAWl Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Giovanni Biscuolo schreef op ma 13-06-2022 om 11:34 [+0200]: > Maxime I have a question for you please: do you really think that in > the NixOS community Going by the Java example, yes, at least for some of the NixOS community. I've also seen this interpretation of reproducibility in Clojure (there was some question on building things from source and reproducibility, and the response was something along the line =E2=80=98usi= ng upstream binaries is 100% reproducible=E2=80=99). > (or any other project mentioned in > https://reproducible-builds.org/who/projects/) the term reproducible > is > interpreted in that way? I don't know about all of them, but for Guix and Debian: no. > IMVHO if we continue using the term reproducible in that trivial way > [3] > when talking about software (this include each and every scientific > paper [4]), we will never get to any point; reproducible is what > reproducible means: https://reproducible-builds.org/docs/definition/ Exactly, trivial interpretations aren't really the point, because trivial. > [...] > I was just hoping that nowadays "reproducible" is perceived as "build > reproducible" (as defined in the definition above) by all software > developers and many users (including scientists) I'd hope so, yes. > P.S.: or you Maxime are just playng the devil's advocate? :-D No, I'm not advocating that trivial reproducibility is useful or the goal or such. My response was some speculation on an answer to the following question: > but it's impossible to me to understand how a packaged upstream jar > can be considered reproducible (and bootstrappable); --=-L+sIwSxEoSUGxfTAOAWl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYqcV9RccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7s62AP90HBeTVw+MoFzoUyP901ab7TSm IHqdVOTSnFedxkgADAD/SsCXnsXRPMUcZBAuht4TCk71eMU8VuYEwrxxGrSF0wI= =uy3C -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-L+sIwSxEoSUGxfTAOAWl--