Hi Gábor and Vagrant, Vagrant Cascadian writes: > There's been some discussion about this in Debian and in reproducible > builds: > > https://bugs.debian.org/783938 > > https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsInDocumentationGeneratedByJavadoc > > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/issues/unstable/timestamps_in_documentation_generated_by_javadoc_issue.html > > Hope it's useful! Thank you for the links! Gábor Boskovits writes: > Björn Höfling ezt írta (időpont: > 2018. okt. 12., P, 20:01): >> >> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 19:35:51 +0200 >> Gábor Boskovits wrote: >> >> > Gábor Boskovits ezt írta (időpont: 2018. okt. >> > 12., P, 19:00): >> > > >> > > Hello guix, >> > > >> > > I've tracked down the javadoc timestamp problem. >> > > There is a command line flag for javadoc (notimestamp), that >> > > disables generating the comment in the docs that contains the >> > > timestamp. Currently I see two ways forward: >> > > 1. Track down the calls to javadoc, and add the flag to all calls. >> > > 2. Write a simple patch to make javadoc behave as if notimestamp was >> > > specified, whenever >> > > SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH is defined. >> > > I do not think, that the patch produced by 2 is upstreamable, but it >> > > seems much less work. WDYT? >> > >> > Also we can simply turn off the timestamp generation >> > unconditionally... >> >> Number 2 sounds good, and why not giving it a try to place it upstream? > > Ok, i will go for it, and try to get it upsreamed for jdk8 and jdk11. Be sure to check out the links Vagrant posted. Specifically this one: https://bugs.debian.org/783938 In that bug report, Samuel Thibault says: "Perhaps javadoc could be made to use by default the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH environment variable when it is defined?" There seems to be agreement that teaching javadoc to honor the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH environment variable would be preferable to unconditionally disabling the timestamp behavior. -- Chris