Request for merging "tex-team" branch

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
2 participants
  • Andreas Enge
  • Nicolas Goaziou
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Nicolas Goaziou
Severity
normal
N
N
Nicolas Goaziou wrote on 13 May 11:00 +0200
(address . guix-patches@gnu.org)
87r0e6w0fz.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr
Hello,

The "tex-team" branch contains import fixes and improvements for Guix
modular TeX Live distribution. In particular, it solves the important
slowdown experienced when compiling documents, and vastly improves
modularity wrt to binaries.

Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
A
A
Andreas Enge wrote on 21 Jun 14:47 +0200
Closing this bug for now?
(address . 70915@debbugs.gnu.org)(name . Christopher Baines)(address . mail@cbaines.net)
ZnV2bcYpsZSHh1yo@jurong
Hello Nicolas,

there are a lot of commits still being added to the top of this branch.
As I understand it, this causes it to be repeatedly evaluated and built
by QA, resulting in a waste of build power.

Should we close this bug for now until the branch has reached its final
shape for the next merge? Or maybe keep it in its current shape until it
is merged and only then add new commits?

Andreas
N
N
Nicolas Goaziou wrote on 21 Jun 22:07 +0200
(name . Andreas Enge)(address . andreas@enge.fr)
87bk3ujc0g.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr
Hello,

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> there are a lot of commits still being added to the top of this branch.
> As I understand it, this causes it to be repeatedly evaluated and built
> by QA, resulting in a waste of build power.

I'm sorry that my work wastes (!) build power.

About a month ago, the branch was already ready to be merged, but it
never[¹] got the chance to be allocated the few CPU cycles necessary to
start building something. I doubt it did waste anything because I hardly
got any feedback from QA since the request for merging was issued.

As the situation wasn't moving, I resumed my work on the branch. There
are some more commits to come, indeed, but I expect the last steps to be
done in the following days.

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> Should we close this bug for now until the branch has reached its final
> shape for the next merge? Or maybe keep it in its current shape until it
> is merged and only then add new commits?

If your suggestion means the branch will have to wait more months before
being merged, I dislike it. The branch will be ready in a few days. What
is done with this branch does not belong to me.

Regards,

[¹] Actually, it happened once, but for some reason, builds stopped.

--
Nicolas Goaziou
A
A
Andreas Enge wrote on 21 Jun 22:20 +0200
(name . Nicolas Goaziou)(address . mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr)
ZnXgeQRgQLwv5NWG@jurong
Am Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:07:11PM +0200 schrieb Nicolas Goaziou:
Toggle quote (5 lines)
> About a month ago, the branch was already ready to be merged, but it
> never[ￜ] got the chance to be allocated the few CPU cycles necessary to
> start building something. I doubt it did waste anything because I hardly
> got any feedback from QA since the request for merging was issued.

Well, it probably was never fully built, but it did start. I have seen
packages of the tex-team branch being compiled in the past few days.
The revisions corresponding to several commits were evaluated also.

Toggle quote (7 lines)
> > Should we close this bug for now until the branch has reached its final
> > shape for the next merge? Or maybe keep it in its current shape until it
> > is merged and only then add new commits?
> If your suggestion means the branch will have to wait more months before
> being merged, I dislike it. The branch will be ready in a few days. What
> is done with this branch does not belong to me.

I suppose we can manually change the priorities of the branch merge
requests, but do not know how to do so myself.

If we do not close this bug, maybe it would be good to not push more
commits to the branch on the server until your work is finished; I am
quite certain that QA works on evaluating intermediate commits.

Andreas
N
N
Nicolas Goaziou wrote on 21 Jun 23:31 +0200
(name . Andreas Enge)(address . andreas@enge.fr)
877ceij83z.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr
Hello,

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

Toggle quote (3 lines)
> Well, it probably was never fully built, but it did start. I have seen
> packages of the tex-team branch being compiled in the past few days.

I doubt it, for some value of "the past few days". "core-updates" did
build some TeX Live packages. Meanwhile, "tex-team" branch was sitting
on top of a commit QA never managed to handle.

Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
N
N
Nicolas Goaziou wrote on 25 Jun 00:35 +0200
(name . Andreas Enge)(address . andreas@enge.fr)
87frt2j7ej.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr
Hello,

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

Toggle quote (4 lines)
> If we do not close this bug, maybe it would be good to not push more
> commits to the branch on the server until your work is finished; I am
> quite certain that QA works onn evaluating intermediate commits.

For the record, the "tex-team" branch is now feature-complete.
I refreshed the branch one last time.

I now wait for bordeaux to start building those packages so I can fix
issues that may (will?) arise. Since this will happen after
"core-updates" merge, it may be necessary to rebase "tex-team" on top of
master at that time, or the expected feedback may be biased.

Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
N
N
Nicolas Goaziou wrote on 6 Sep 15:28 +0200
Re: Request for merging "tex-team" branch
(address . 70915-done@debbugs.gnu.org)
875xr8oqqw.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr
Hello,

Closing this report since the branch was merged along with latest core-updates.

Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
Closed
?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 70915@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 70915
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