Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds
And indeed it's not reproducible according to policy: it's storing the build user at the very least.
Let's look at the mdds package, that has red unreproducible entries in
the maintainer dashboard:
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/mdds.html
mdds is unreproducible only in sid since more things (including the
build path) are varied there. The information behind "differences"
confirms that the build path is the only issue.
According to policy, mdds is reproducible.
And indeed its unreproducibility is not reported in tracker and ddpo (DMD does because it's using a source data that includes everything, not just the state we want to push. But then, DMD has a tendency to show *lots* of things, if you disagree with it, please take it to the DMD maintainer, not us).
Unless policy is supposed to be completely detached from reality,
the criteria for claiming in various places that a package is
unreproducible have to match the policy definition of reproducibility.
IMHO, you are arguing about a non existent issue. I believe we are always being reasonable, otherwise I'd like to ask you to point us to actual situation where we could have acted better. Yes, I'm aware of the src:libreoffice case.
Reply to: