[reproducible-website] 01/01: some more reformatting

Wed Mar 8 17:11:32 UTC 2017

This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.

holger pushed a commit to branch master
in repository reproducible-website.

commit efda220cd8559baaf32285dfbcfc1d835056632f
Author: Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org>
Date:   Wed Mar 8 18:11:24 2017 +0100

    some more reformatting
    
    Signed-off-by: Holger Levsen <holger at layer-acht.org>
---
 _events/berlin2016/documentation.md | 73 ++++++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

diff --git a/_events/berlin2016/documentation.md b/_events/berlin2016/documentation.md
index 598dcd3..7c71c29 100644
--- a/_events/berlin2016/documentation.md
+++ b/_events/berlin2016/documentation.md
@@ -10,8 +10,6 @@ permalink: /events/berlin2016/documentation/
 in between :colons: are action items, meaning somebody offered to do
 this, or if it's not a name, then we still miss somebody to do it.
 
-=====================================================================
-
 Previously
 ----------
 
@@ -33,16 +31,16 @@ What's missing? We do not want a webpage, we want documentation.
 Discussion
 -----------
 
-Who is the audience of the current documentation?
+### Who is the audience of the current documentation?
 
  - Package maintainers for example
  - OpenBSD and other people who have not started making their stuff reproducible
 
-Documentation should not be only for Debian but cross-distro
+### Documentation should not be only for Debian but cross-distro
 
  - does this constitute a barrier or can it be done cross-distro?
 
-Distros or build tools?
+### Distros or build tools?
 
  - In Debian = easy to define how many percent of the repo are
 reproducible, because we have official repos. With Android apps it
@@ -57,14 +55,14 @@ hard to find for other distros/projects.
  - this could be done automatically (scanning through debian/patches
 meta headers)
 
-- Best practices documentation, but this needs to be ordered somehow.
--> One could use personas or categories for restructuring the page:
+ - Best practices documentation, but this needs to be ordered somehow.
+ - One could use personas or categories for restructuring the page:
 User, Upstream, Distro, Developers etc.
 
-Holger wants to get rid of the Debian wiki. and propose all information
+ - Holger wants to get rid of the Debian wiki. and propose all information
 for Debian, Gentoo, RPMs etc. on r-b.org
 Because there is not that much Debian specific stuff to it.
--> Several solutions have a similar mindsets, so it's a good idea to mix
+ - Several solutions have a similar mindsets, so it's a good idea to mix
 all this information on the website documentation, but using well
 structured categories (user, upstream, distro, general) and sections for
 each distro or build tool.
@@ -72,52 +70,54 @@ each distro or build tool.
 - Some tools are shared, like GCC,  but some aren't like dpkg. But the
 approaches that one takes are relevant.
 
-What's the tools behind the r-b.org website?
--> Git repository on the bottom. markdown + jekyll. -> then one can send
+### What's the tools behind the r-b.org website?
+
+ - Git repository on the bottom. markdown + jekyll. -> then one can send
 patches, pull requests or commit rights.
--> Proposal to mirror this one Github, so that people can easily edit
+ - Proposal to mirror this one Github, so that people can easily edit
 stuff and make pull requests -> but we also want mirroring :ho1ger:
--> This should then be mentioned on the website and mailing list! :ho1ger:
+ - This should then be mentioned on the website and mailing list! :ho1ger:
 
-Who should work on this?
-- It could be cool to have an intern/Outreachy person work on the
+### Who should work on this?
+ - It could be cool to have an intern/Outreachy person work on the
 reorganization of the documentation, contact distros, understand how
 this works
--> don't forget that this needs mentoring
--> put this proposal on the agenda of Outreachy for the next round
+ - don't forget that this needs mentoring
+ - put this proposal on the agenda of Outreachy for the next round
 :actionitem:
 
-- proposal: document examples of projects that have worked on RB.
-storytelling. What's the expected reponse: See that something is
+### proposal: document examples of projects that have worked on RB.
+ - storytelling. What's the expected reponse: See that something is
 happening? Gives a sense of the scale of RB.
--> There should be talks and slides linked. Vagrant, Lunar, Torproject
+ - There should be talks and slides linked. Vagrant, Lunar, Torproject
 etc. :actionitem:
--> Moving talks from the Debian wiki to the website :actionitem:
--> remove the old pages from the Debian wiki so that content does not
+ - Moving talks from the Debian wiki to the website :actionitem:
+ - remove the old pages from the Debian wiki so that content does not
 get duplicated :actionitem:
 
--> don't just have a long documentation, but also a very consice FAQ for
+### don't just have a long documentation, but also a very consice FAQ for
 upstreams for example.
--> why is reproducibility important, where do i get information for this
+ - why is reproducibility important, where do i get information for this
 or that?
--> the ideal documentation, how would it look like? realistically!
+ - the ideal documentation, how would it look like? realistically!
 
-- What is the definition of "Reproducible Build"?
--> We want to have an agreement on what it means to be reproducible. :we
+### What is the definition of "Reproducible Build"?
+ - We want to have an agreement on what it means to be reproducible. :we
 might try to define this during the summit:
-- it's better to have some definition, because we currently we don't
+ - it's better to have some definition, because we currently we don't
 have anything.
-- some proposal was "RB is the result of creating a binary from a source
+ - some proposal was "RB is the result of creating a binary from a source
 and ensure it is bit by bit identic."
-- we do have a problem about metadata and its definition
-- it's like with Free Software licenses, some are more free than others ;)
-- we could try to agree on a sentence which we all agree on at least :)
-- because "there is a lot of things we actually agree on"
-- Which tools can be used to verify reproducibility?
-        - we don't use special diff tools to see if something is the same. We
+ - we do have a problem about metadata and its definition
+ - it's like with Free Software licenses, some are more free than others ;)
+ - we could try to agree on a sentence which we all agree on at least :)
+ - because "there is a lot of things we actually agree on"
+
+### Which tools can be used to verify reproducibility?
+ - we don't use special diff tools to see if something is the same. We
 need to have the same way of verifying and we need to include this into
 the definition or a subsection of this definition.
-        - Why? : problem with apk (android), contains jar signature, same with
+ - Why? : problem with apk (android), contains jar signature, same with
 rpm which includes signatures inside the rpm. In Debian, we have the
 idea to use SHA-sums. OTOH, iOS binaries are all different, because each
 one uses a special device key
@@ -125,4 +125,3 @@ one uses a special device key
         - Signal i.e. has a specific tool to compare two signal builds. That's
 very wrong.
 
--

-- 
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on /srv/git.debian.org/git/reproducible/reproducible-website.git

