> > > > > I think a better question would be to add 'on Windows' to what you're asking, > > > > because > > > > > I don't see why we should all have to put up with this BS just because of a > > Linux > > > > > distro. > > > > > > > > "This BS"? When on earth have you ever actually used this information, or are > you > > > > just arguing for the sake of arguing? > > > > > > I've restored backups from CD before (where file mod dates have been lost during > > > burning etc.) and always found it handy to see when things were built. > > > > > > what we've replaced it with is just an additional version number, it tells you > > > nothing of when the software was built, so we've essentially dropped a perfectly > > > useful human readable field of data for the sake of some dumb linux distro. > > > > Except Debian is probably one of the top 5 Linux distributions, and it makes > perfect > > sense if you think of it from the perspective of being able to make reproducible > > builds. Ideally, the user should be able to reproduce an identical binary to the > one > > that's currently being shipped. The fact that you're fucking ignorant that you > think > > that Debian is "some dumb linux distro" is evidence enough that you don't have a > > fucking clue and have no basis for calling any kind of shots when it comes to this > > sort of feature. > > > > For someone who bitches as much as you do as to the lack of contributors, you sure > > don't seem to give a fuck about supporting a feature that would mean more > > contributors. The fuck is wrong with you? > > I'm saying leave the date there on Windows, just because it's a popular thing to do > on Linux, and it makes sense in some contexts doesn't mean it makes sense in all of > them, it is typical dumb idealist Linux BS, I'm sorry, but things like this just > reinforce my opinion there. > > There are reasons Windows is still the primary PC OS, and things like this (ie > stripping information people can digest) is one of them, we don't need to fall into > that trap, so yeah, give them what they want, but why take it away from everybody > else too? > > You had a rant the other day about putting yourself in the shoes of ordinary users, > and how being a dev can cloud that, this is a prime example, ordinary users prefer to > see a build date.
Builds would be repeatable if instead of the build date it had the date of the GIT version (or whatever). Can't that be done somehow?