From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor_Boskovits?= <boskovits@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Making javadoc reproducible
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 20:14:24 +0200
Message-ID: <CAE4v=phLmgM8xAx3X7FLcOXKteWzNnex6XeKszgim_VsCC7m=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAE4v=phFRSq98fJGz4b0mVvSUTfnuOVO+tUwqNGGKxHfMDTtVg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE4v=pi5fbxcryAd3aUpXEUox1O_PBKfs9mkvP-uUr2WQ6-M8w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20181012200135.505ba447@alma-ubu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52518)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <boskovits@gmail.com>) id 1gB1xO-0003ew-G6
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:14:39 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <boskovits@gmail.com>) id 1gB1xN-0001c5-Pj
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:14:38 -0400
Received: from mail-it1-x12e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e]:40910)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <boskovits@gmail.com>) id 1gB1xN-0001bY-HF
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:14:37 -0400
Received: by mail-it1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id i191-v6so19464896iti.5
	for <guix-devel@gnu.org>; Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20181012200135.505ba447@alma-ubu>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIEjDtmZsaW5n?= <bjoern.hoefling@bjoernhoefling.de>
Cc: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Bj=C3=B6rn H=C3=B6fling <bjoern.hoefling@bjoernhoefling.de> ezt =C3=ADrta (=
id=C5=91pont:
2018. okt. 12., P, 20:01):
>
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 19:35:51 +0200
> G=C3=A1bor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > G=C3=A1bor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont:=
 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.

>
> Bj=C3=B6rn