[PATCH] HACKING: Describe guix-patches@gnu.org as the list for patches.

contact.ng0 wrote on 28 Feb 2017 12:51

Recipients:(address . guix-patches@gnu.org)(name . ng0)(address . contact.ng0@cryptolab.net)

Message-ID:20170228115120.7391-1-contact.ng0@cryptolab.net

--- HACKING | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Toggle diff (26 lines)diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKINGindex 1e0bddfaf..76568cfcb 100644--- a/HACKING+++ b/HACKING@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ Copyright © 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> Copyright © 2015, 2017 Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org> Copyright © 2017 Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>+Copyright © 2017 ng0 <contact.ng0@cryptolab.net>    Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification,   are permitted in any medium without royalty provided the copyright@@ -25,8 +26,9 @@ convenient.  When you deem it necessary, feel free to ask for it on the mailing list.  When you get commit access, please make sure to follow the policy below (discussions of the policy can take place on guix-devel@gnu.org.) -Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-devel@gnu.org (trivial-patches include fixing typos, etc.)+Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-patches@gnu.org (trivial+patches include fixing typos, etc.).  The patches sent to this list can be+tracked in its [[https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=guix-patches][debbugs webinterface]].  For patches that just add a new package, and a simple one, it’s OK to commit, if you’re confident (which means you successfully built it in a chroot setup,-- 2.12.0

Marius Bakke wrote on 28 Feb 2017 15:08

Re: bug#25899: [PATCH] HACKING: Describe guix-patches@gnu.org as the list for patches.

Recipients:

Message-ID:87varu1k81.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me

contact.ng0@cryptolab.net writes:

Toggle quote (14 lines)> diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING> index 1e0bddfaf..76568cfcb 100644> --- a/HACKING> +++ b/HACKING> @@ -25,8 +26,9 @@ convenient.  When you deem it necessary, feel free to ask for it on the>  mailing list.  When you get commit access, please make sure to follow the>  policy below (discussions of the policy can take place on guix-devel@gnu.org.)>  > -Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-devel@gnu.org (trivial> -patches include fixing typos, etc.)> +Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-patches@gnu.org (trivial> +patches include fixing typos, etc.).  The patches sent to this list can be> +tracked in its [[https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=guix-patches][debbugs webinterface]].

I prefer using guix-devel for discussing patches and want to keep usingit normally. I see "guix-patches" more of a "package incubator",especially for newcomers. For regular contributors using "guix-devel" toask for feedback before pushing is fine too IMO.

Ricardo Wurmus wrote on 28 Feb 2017 17:22

Re: bug#25899: [PATCH] HACKING: Describe guix-patches@gnu.org as the list for patches.

Recipients:(name . Marius Bakke)(address . mbakke@fastmail.com)

Message-ID:87wpcab7zn.fsf@elephly.net

Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> writes:

Toggle quote (22 lines)> contact.ng0@cryptolab.net writes:>>>> diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING>> index 1e0bddfaf..76568cfcb 100644>> --- a/HACKING>> +++ b/HACKING>> @@ -25,8 +26,9 @@ convenient.  When you deem it necessary, feel free to ask for it on the>>  mailing list.  When you get commit access, please make sure to follow the>>  policy below (discussions of the policy can take place on guix-devel@gnu.org.)>>>> -Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-devel@gnu.org (trivial>> -patches include fixing typos, etc.)>> +Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-patches@gnu.org (trivial>> +patches include fixing typos, etc.).  The patches sent to this list can be>> +tracked in its [[https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=guix-patches][debbugs webinterface]].>> I prefer using guix-devel for discussing patches and want to keep using> it normally. I see "guix-patches" more of a "package incubator",> especially for newcomers. For regular contributors using "guix-devel" to> ask for feedback before pushing is fine too IMO.

In my opinion *most* patches (especially patches to add packages) oughtto be sent to “guix-patches”. “guix-devel” is for discussions of plans,features, and more involved changes.
What’s great about “guix-patches” is that we can much more easily keeptrack of the patches that are submitted in this way. With “guix-devel”discussions it’s hard to figure out if further action is required.
@ng0: The patch looks good to me, though I’d prefer if it includedadditional instructions that are specific to patch submission to adebbugs-backed list. It’s worth noting that patches be either sent inone direct email or as replies to a ticket acknowledgement. Thisprevents flooding of the tracker.
Do you think you could add language like that? Just a sentence or twowould probably be sufficient.
--Ricardo
GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAChttps://elephly.net

ng0 wrote on 1 Mar 2017 13:04

Re: bug#25899: [PATCH] HACKING: Describe guix-patches@gnu.org as the list for patches.

Recipients:(name . Marius Bakke)(address . mbakke@fastmail.com)(address . 25899@debbugs.gnu.org)

Message-ID:20170301120437.ww6gbmlbd5xkfxeo@abyayala

On 17-02-28 15:08:30, Marius Bakke wrote:

Toggle quote (22 lines)> contact.ng0@cryptolab.net writes:> > > > diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING> > index 1e0bddfaf..76568cfcb 100644> > --- a/HACKING> > +++ b/HACKING> > @@ -25,8 +26,9 @@ convenient.  When you deem it necessary, feel free to ask for it on the> >  mailing list.  When you get commit access, please make sure to follow the> >  policy below (discussions of the policy can take place on guix-devel@gnu.org.)> >  > > -Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-devel@gnu.org (trivial> > -patches include fixing typos, etc.)> > +Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-patches@gnu.org (trivial> > +patches include fixing typos, etc.).  The patches sent to this list can be> > +tracked in its [[https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=guix-patches][debbugs webinterface]].> > I prefer using guix-devel for discussing patches and want to keep using> it normally. I see "guix-patches" more of a "package incubator",> especially for newcomers. For regular contributors using "guix-devel" to> ask for feedback before pushing is fine too IMO.

That's not the intention of guix-patches, and it never was. Please readthe annoncement email and the discussion before it.

ng0 wrote on 1 Mar 2017 13:06

Re: bug#25899: [PATCH] HACKING: Describe guix-patches@gnu.org as the list for patches.

Recipients:(name . Ricardo Wurmus)(address . rekado@elephly.net)

Message-ID:20170301120628.sdqwt4q4xisa25i6@abyayala

On 17-02-28 17:22:36, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:

Toggle quote (49 lines)> > Marius Bakke <mbakke@fastmail.com> writes:> > > contact.ng0@cryptolab.net writes:> >> >> >> diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING> >> index 1e0bddfaf..76568cfcb 100644> >> --- a/HACKING> >> +++ b/HACKING> >> @@ -25,8 +26,9 @@ convenient.  When you deem it necessary, feel free to ask for it on the> >>  mailing list.  When you get commit access, please make sure to follow the> >>  policy below (discussions of the policy can take place on guix-devel@gnu.org.)> >>> >> -Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-devel@gnu.org (trivial> >> -patches include fixing typos, etc.)> >> +Non-trivial patches should always be posted to guix-patches@gnu.org (trivial> >> +patches include fixing typos, etc.).  The patches sent to this list can be> >> +tracked in its [[https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=guix-patches][debbugs webinterface]].> >> > I prefer using guix-devel for discussing patches and want to keep using> > it normally. I see "guix-patches" more of a "package incubator",> > especially for newcomers. For regular contributors using "guix-devel" to> > ask for feedback before pushing is fine too IMO.> > In my opinion *most* patches (especially patches to add packages) ought> to be sent to “guix-patches”.  “guix-devel” is for discussions of plans,> features, and more involved changes.> > What’s great about “guix-patches” is that we can much more easily keep> track of the patches that are submitted in this way.  With “guix-devel”> discussions it’s hard to figure out if further action is required.> > @ng0: The patch looks good to me, though I’d prefer if it included> additional instructions that are specific to patch submission to a> debbugs-backed list.  It’s worth noting that patches be either sent in> one direct email or as replies to a ticket acknowledgement.  This> prevents flooding of the tracker.> > Do you think you could add language like that?  Just a sentence or two> would probably be sufficient.> > --> Ricardo> > GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6  2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC> https://elephly.net> 

Thanks. Okay, I will see to get it fixed similar to the patch whichchanged/added the guix-patches@ to the doc/*.texi

Ludovic Courtès wrote on 11 Mar 2017 22:19

control message for bug #25899

Recipients:(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)

Message-ID:87mvcr5x53.fsf@gnu.org

tags 25899 moreinfo

Ludovic Courtès wrote on 14 Mar 2017 10:24

Re: bug#25899: [PATCH] HACKING: Describe guix-patches@gnu.org as the list for patches.

Recipients:(name . Ricardo Wurmus)(address . rekado@elephly.net)

Message-ID:87zigonrd3.fsf@gnu.org

Hello!
Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

Toggle quote (9 lines)

> @ng0: The patch looks good to me, though I’d prefer if it included> additional instructions that are specific to patch submission to a> debbugs-backed list. It’s worth noting that patches be either sent in> one direct email or as replies to a ticket acknowledgement. This> prevents flooding of the tracker.>> Do you think you could add language like that? Just a sentence or two> would probably be sufficient.

So what’s the conclusion of this? :-)
Commit 230efa876fea3b38f78502bd759b2943651929de updated the manual tomention guix-patches. Do we need anything more?
Thanks,Ludo’.

ng0 wrote on 14 Mar 2017 13:24

Recipients:(name . Ludovic Courtès)(address . ludo@gnu.org)

Message-ID:20170314122440.adh42xmngibqnehl@abyayala

Ludovic Courtès transcribed 0.7K bytes:

Toggle quote (15 lines)> Hello!> > Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:> > > @ng0: The patch looks good to me, though I’d prefer if it included> > additional instructions that are specific to patch submission to a> > debbugs-backed list.  It’s worth noting that patches be either sent in> > one direct email or as replies to a ticket acknowledgement.  This> > prevents flooding of the tracker.> >> > Do you think you could add language like that?  Just a sentence or two> > would probably be sufficient.> > So what’s the conclusion of this?  :-)

I am busy, I will finish this when I have the time to work on it.

Toggle quote (3 lines)

> Commit 230efa876fea3b38f78502bd759b2943651929de updated the manual to> mention guix-patches. Do we need anything more?

Apparently yes, as people still send patches to guix-devel and at thetime when I wrote this patch were not aware of guix-patches.

Toggle quote (2 lines)

> Thanks,> Ludo’.

Ricardo Wurmus wrote on 14 Mar 2017 12:27

Recipients:(name . ng0)(address . contact.ng0@cryptolab.net)

Message-ID:87pohkw11j.fsf@elephly.net

ng0 <contact.ng0@cryptolab.net> writes:

Toggle quote (6 lines)

>> Commit 230efa876fea3b38f78502bd759b2943651929de updated the manual to>> mention guix-patches. Do we need anything more?>> Apparently yes, as people still send patches to guix-devel and at the> time when I wrote this patch were not aware of guix-patches.

I agree. It would be good to mention “guix-patches” in HACKING. To me,patches that are in “guix-patches” have a much lower risk to be drownedout by other discussions.
--Ricardo
GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAChttps://elephly.net

Ludovic Courtès wrote on 15 Mar 2017 17:01

Recipients:(name . Ricardo Wurmus)(address . rekado@elephly.net)

Message-ID:87r31y8r6k.fsf@gnu.org

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

Toggle quote (12 lines)> ng0 <contact.ng0@cryptolab.net> writes:>>>> Commit 230efa876fea3b38f78502bd759b2943651929de updated the manual to>>> mention guix-patches.  Do we need anything more?>>>> Apparently yes, as people still send patches to guix-devel and at the>> time when I wrote this patch were not aware of guix-patches.>> I agree.  It would be good to mention “guix-patches” in HACKING.  To me,> patches that are in “guix-patches” have a much lower risk to be drowned> out by other discussions.

Done in bc551cf32b6ccb3f8dd60b1d0d4e3c3e88cb1f8d!
Ludo'.

Closed

Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send email to 25899@debbugs.gnu.org

is:open	open issues
is:done	closed issues
submitter:<who>	search issue submitter
author:<who>	search by message author
date:yesterday..now	search by issue date
mdate:3m..2d	search by message date