GH-46336: [Release][Packaging] Add support for Reproducible Builds for source archive
Rationale for this change
See https://reproducible-builds.org/ for Reproducible Builds.
Automated Release Signing requires this: https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html#automated-release-signing
What changes are included in this PR?
- Make
dev/release/utils-create-release-tarball.shreproducible - Test it by reprotest: https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/reprotest
- Verify source archive reproducibility in RC verification script
Are these changes tested?
Yes.
Are there any user-facing changes?
No.
- GitHub Issue: #46336
:warning: GitHub issue #46336 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.
Ah, https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html#automated-release-signing includes the following:
The release procedure contains a validation step where all artifacts are reproduced on trusted hardware before publication to pages intended for end users
We need to add a reproducible check to dev/release/verify-release-candidate.sh for it.
We need to add a reproducible check to
dev/release/verify-release-candidate.shfor it.
Implemented.
@assignUser @raulcd Do you want to review this before we request a review from INFRA?
I asked INFRA to review and enable automatic release signing for source arhicve: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-26808
Sorry, I didn't have time to have a look so far, but this is great!
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-26808?focusedCommentId=17982692&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17982692
INFRA set secrets.ARROW_GPG_SECRET_KEY. I'll use it in this PR.
I'm waiting an answer from INFRA because INFRA might set typo-ed secret variable name.
If there is no answer in this week, I'll merge this without an answer from INFRA.
There is a typo in secret variable name. I'll merge this after the typo is fixed by INFRA.
The typo was fixed: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-26808?focusedCommentId=17986958&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17986958
I'll merge this to try this in 21.0.0 release.
After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 3 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit a4d735aa80bf138651071f110f676aaab8ebf0a2.
There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉
The full Conbench report has more details.