On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Mickael Istria <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 01/07/2016 06:08 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote:
>
> -1 to forcing the use of refs/for/x
>
> The validation results are unreliable as the aggregation build is not
> safely reproducible. A failed validation result is just as likely to be due
> to someone changing their already-contributed repository.
>
> Is there a bug on the topic of unreliable validation results? I agree that
> having them reliable seems to be a preliminary requirement.
> By the way, some time ago, we discussed the idea of policies about
> contributing immutable URLs and fully qualified versions to Simrel, in
> order to provide predictability and reproducibility. Have these ideas been
> abandoned? If we were to enforce review, we could put additional checks to
> verify at least that versions are fully qualified.
>

The planning council has made this a requirement for Neon. I'm not sure how
enforceable this is going to be but if everyone follows the rules, the
aggregate build will be reproducible.


>
> --
> Mickael Istria
> Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools>
> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets
> <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev

Reply via email to