> Does it make sense to add a new optional metadata field to store the > value of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH if it's set when a distribution is built? I > guess it could cause problems if unpacking & repacking a tarball means > that its metadata is no longer accurate, though.
That make sens – and that would be useful, but then that mean you need to have the sdist to reproduce the sdist... I was more thinking of a location in the source-tree/commit; for example in pyproject.toml's tool section. So if I give you only that you can tell me "When I build the sdist I get this sha256", and I can do the same independently. -- M On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Thomas Kluyver <tho...@kluyver.me.uk> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017, at 07:16 PM, Matthias Bussonnier wrote: >> Second; is there a convention to store the SDE value ? I don't seem to >> be able to find one. It is nice to have reproducible build; but if >> it's a pain for reproducers to find the SDE value that highly decrease >> the value of SDE build. > > Does it make sense to add a new optional metadata field to store the > value of SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH if it's set when a distribution is built? I > guess it could cause problems if unpacking & repacking a tarball means > that its metadata is no longer accurate, though. > > Thomas > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
