I’m not sure exactly why this is being downvoted. It seems pretty fair to want your container builds to not fail because of the “chaos” with docker images and how they change quite a lot. This isn’t about the freedom to build how you want, it’s about securing your build pipelines so that they don’t break at 4am because docker only builds 99% of the time.
I’ll use docker, I like docker, but I can see the point of how it’s not necessarily advantageous if stability is your main goal.
It's more complicated than that. Reproducible builds help build confidence that your build process isn't compromised.
Sure, your compiler, your hardware, or your distro might be compromised, but if you follow the chain all the way through you does indeed validate version X does result in SHA y, there's now less things were blindly trusting.
It also helps with things like rolling back to earlier versions when you don't still have the binary kicking around without having to revalidate the binary.
If you're not getting the same SHA on different hardware, weeks apart, even if it's good enough for you, it's not reproducible
I’ll use docker, I like docker, but I can see the point of how it’s not necessarily advantageous if stability is your main goal.