Hi! On Sat, 2016-11-12 at 19:04:53 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've noticed several things with the > current .buildinfo format, even after the cleanup pre-merge, that > I'd like to fix or change so that we can hopefully reach Format 1.0.
Ok, let's see what's the current status: > Some of the issues, that bother me: > > * .buildinfo files are not currently signed Fixed. Pending debsign (from devscipts) doing the same. > * .buildinfo filename Fixed. Now they use the same format as .changes files. > * dpkg-genbuildinfo injects itself into debian/files I think this is fine for now, we can always revisit later on. In any case this is an implementation detail not affecting the .buildinfo format. > * .buildinfo files are not generated when creating source-only uploads Fixed. Now always generated. > * .buildinfo has some issues when including .dsc information > > Only the .dsc file is referenced not all of its contents, it might > be better to match .changes logic here. Also the “source” > pseudo-architecture does not get added to the Architecture field. > I'll just do at least the latter, I'm open for discussion on the > former. Partially fixed. The source is now included in the Architecture field. The inclusion is not recursive, but I think this is fine, and we should be able to add them if we deem it important in the future w/o breaking the format. > * Some of the environment variables seem superfluous or leaks Ignored. This is valuable information, so it seems fine. Also new variables are alos tracked now. > I'll probably do some of the fixes already and bump Format to 0.2 > and after the discussion settles we can perhaps do a 0.3, and see how > it goes, and iterate until it looks good, at which point we'd declare > it 1.0, ideally before the freeze. :) So given the above, I've queued a minimal change declaring the format 1.0 for dpkg 1.18.23 or .24, please shout if you see any additional problem or blocker. Thanks, Guillem
