On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Kenneth Pronovici <prono...@debian.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Reiner Herrmann <rei...@reiner-h.de> wrote:
>> Thanks for considering it! :)
>> We uploaded also a patched epydoc to our repository today and are
>> currently rebuilding affected packages [1]. The page should be
>> updated soon.
> Ok, what you're asking for makes sense to me.  I agree that it seems
> worthwhile to make these changes in Epydoc.  I'm traveling this week
> for work.  Unless Edward objects, I'll plan to apply the patch and
> upload a new package to unstable sometime after I'm back, hopefully no
> later than next weekend.

I have filed a related bug in the upstream bug tracker:

I updated the original patch to include man/epydoc.1, adding a section
called REPRODUCIBLE BUILD BEHAVIOR.  I also tweaked the patch
description to better match the bug report I filed at SourceForge.

I'll be uploading 3.0.1+dfsg-8 later today, including this patch.  I
have tested epydoc's general behavior, but I have not specifically
tested the behavior around SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH.  I am assuming you will
tell me if the current version of the package does not meet your needs
for the Reproducible Builds effort.

Please let me know if you need anything else.


Kenneth J. Pronovici <prono...@debian.org>

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to