The current bitlbee-discord@0.4.3 does not work with glib@2.70.2

Done

Details

3 participants

Adam Maleszka
Liliana Marie Prikler
Ludovic Courtès

Owner: unassigned

Submitted by: Adam Maleszka

Severity: normal

Adam Maleszka wrote on 7 Feb 2022 09:44

Recipients:(address . bug-guix@gnu.org)

Message-ID:87iltrca11.fsf@aol.com

I'm trying to configure bitlbee-discord in order to write on Discord

using ERC in Emacs. Unfortunately, every time I open connection to

Discord, this error is thrown:

discord - Login error: Failed to switch to websocket mode

Actually, it is a well-known issue caused by breaking changes in the new

version of glib (2.70.X):

https://github.com/sm00th/bitlbee-discord/issues/226A fix is introduced

with commit 607f9887ca85f246e970778e3d40aa5c346365a7:

https://github.com/sm00th/bitlbee-discord/commit/607f9887ca85f246e970778e3d40aa5c346365a7

However, the commit is far newer than the 0.4.3 tag, thus

bitlbee-discord@0.4.3 is unusable with glib@2.70.2.

I see three solutions.

* The first solution --- upgrade bitlbee-discord

This solution involves upgrading bitlbee-discord to the specified

commit. I don't think it will make the package more unstable, especially

after this post:

https://github.com/sm00th/bitlbee-discord/issues/118#issuecomment-606856620

However, it would be good to stick to convention and only introduce

"stable" release versions.

* The second solution --- requesting a new release

That said, I think it would be a good idea to request a new release

from the author, particularly as glib@2.70.X is becoming more common.

However, there is no certainty that the new release would be stable,

though.

* The third solution --- patching current release

Last but not least, what about writing a patch for the current release?

The mentioned commit does not seem complicated. I think it is the best

solution, because it gives us more control while preserving the

stability of the release. However, it is always extra work.

Which solution do you think is the best?

Liliana Marie Prikler wrote on 7 Feb 2022 11:03

Recipients:

Message-ID:1dbd5bae1f9f7e093b2831f99e4bb8993e9b99e8.camel@ist.tugraz.at

Hi,

Am Montag, dem 07.02.2022 um 09:44 +0100 schrieb Adam Maleszka:

Toggle quote (13 lines)> I'm trying to configure bitlbee-discord in order to write on Discord
> using ERC in Emacs. Unfortunately, every time I open connection to
> Discord, this error is thrown:
> 
> [...]
> I see three solutions.

> * The third solution --- patching current release
> 
> Last but not least, what about writing a patch for the current release?
> The mentioned commit does not seem complicated. I think it is the best
> solution, because it gives us more control while preserving the
> stability of the release. However, it is always extra work.

If the patch applies cleanly on 0.4.3, this is to be preferred.

Toggle quote (7 lines)> * The second solution --- requesting a new release
> 
> That said, I think it would be a good idea to request a new release
> from the author, particularly as glib@2.70.X is becoming more common.
> 
> However, there is no certainty that the new release would be stable,
> though.

Upstreams decide what they consider stable enough to tag as release. I

don't think pinging them would be too bad, considering they have a

history of tagging patch releases :)

Toggle quote (9 lines)> * The first solution --- upgrade bitlbee-discord
> 
> This solution involves upgrading bitlbee-discord to the specified
> commit. I don't think it will make the package more unstable,
> especially after this post:
> https://github.com/sm00th/bitlbee-discord/issues/118#issuecomment-606856620
> 
> However, it would be good to stick to convention and only introduce
> "stable" release versions.

If all else fails, this would count as an "exceptional case" to use
commit versioning -- see `info "(guix)Version Numbers"' for more
context.  Don't forget to clearly explain the reason for the commit you
picked in a comment preceding the let-binding, i.e. as in

(define bitlbee-discord
  ;; We use this commit, because ...
  (let ((commit "deadbeef")
        (revision "1"))
    (package�
       ...
       (version (git-version "0.4.3" revision commit))
       ...)))

Of course, instead of deadbeef, use the full commit hash.

Cheers

Adam Maleszka wrote on 7 Feb 2022 15:40

The current bitlbee-discord@0.4.3 does not work with glib@2.70.2

Recipients:(address . 53840@debbugs.gnu.org)

Message-ID:87fsouk9qh.fsf@aol.com

Referenced commit is only 6 commits behind, and there aren't any
breaking changes. Therefore, for testing purposes, I wrote a custom
bitlbee-discord package definition to publish on my channel after
reporting this bug. Since then, I have been chatting with my colleagues
all the time. In other words, connection works smoothly, no errors are
thrown.

In my opinion, there is no need to write additional patches. I will
submit modified version to guix patches.

Ludovic Courtès wrote on 10 Feb 2022 23:28

Re: bug#53850: [PATCH] gnu: bitlbee-discord: Update to 0.4.3-1.607f988

Recipients:(name . Adam Maleszka)(address . adam_maleszka@aol.com)

Message-ID:874k562w7d.fsf_-_@gnu.org

Hi,

Adam Maleszka <adam_maleszka@aol.com> skribis:

Toggle quote (9 lines)

> From b307d3e8bccbef9436502b10192960441f684687 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

> From: Adam Maleszka <adam_maleszka@aol.com>

> Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 16:47:56 +0100

> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: bitlbee-discord: Update to 0.4.3-1.607f988

> ---

> gnu/packages/messaging.scm | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------

> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

I added a commit log and applied it.

Thanks!

Ludo’.

Closed

Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 53840@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it

mumi current 53840

Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)

mumi am -- -s

Or, compose a reply to this issue

mumi compose

Or, send patches to this issue

mumi send-email *.patch

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