intrigeri:
> I think it's problematic to write "compilation reproductible"
> (misleading to the reader + chances to make the reproducible builds
> community unhappy). See
> https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/14554#change-77267 for details.
Oops, that's private ticket. Here's what I wrote there:
I don't know if it's the right place to comment about this, but it's
the first time I see the "compilation" wording in this concept so
I'll mention my concern here: at the Reproducible Builds Summit we
had a conversation about whether it was OK to use the word
"reproducible" for build processes that assemble binary artifacts
from smaller binary artifacts, and don't compile software from
source (i.e. what we do).
Some people had concerns with this but the conclusion was that it's
OK, as long as one is clear about what is built reproducibly.
I think that "compilation" used this way does not satisfy this
requirement. I'd rather not cross (parts of) the Reproducible Builds
community, so I'd really like to see this word replaced by another
one. What about "assemblage"?
