From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Feb 27 09:09:36 2023 Received: (at 61684) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Feb 2023 14:09:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46431 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pWeC7-0001mH-SX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:09:36 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52892) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1pWeC5-0001m5-Pj for 61684@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:09:34 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pWeBz-0000Yd-Vc; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:09:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:To: From; bh=CPRYIrpfb/xFNtjsCP1NHTAWx6i4L7IDrO6rFlQYpL8=; b=BmV/MhKkwuAbOYykL1Tx jmpdGm1/aVnHBlQMM6V/1JBn0KFCI+ayJNZEsgZPBLq8+Ho7yvUyw6CZsZ9ur7N2cv19lFdWFrSGM 1L4hxVYiwhP3lbzoqBqs/QskgCpcWeRij8QKv9p3O2FIO6tgDXLNmcUB3BetBziMRRvod5swEdLfs +UjoR8hcgU+B952gf0VeEyjE+A0i5yzgU2X3A9JvQUmU8A9txTDDfFI62sNA/6tEAqmMLn+QnyzVI wh6k6KvYGk4WOoh7+ftN77oqFN+6p3xcjCvdsBJzJBeR8QxZRqCkpPE78p85EFNzQhicIgglSzTnS cyqEAr8J9V55MA==; Received: from [2001:660:6102:320:e120:2c8f:8909:cdfe] (helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pWeBz-00083B-8w; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:09:27 -0500 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Simon Tournier Subject: Re: bug#61684: can't compose 'with-patch' with 'with-source' References: <87mt56gac6.fsf@gmail.com> <871qmg79u7.fsf@gnu.org> <87356whvaa.fsf@gmail.com> <875ybrmfuv.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 15:09:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <875ybrmfuv.fsf@gmail.com> (Simon Tournier's message of "Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:02:00 +0100") Message-ID: <878rgjkxnw.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 61684 Cc: 61684@debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi! Simon Tournier skribis: >>From my point of view (and what I tried stopping in the middle :-)) is > to report if the transformation makes sense or not. For instance, You stated that multiple times and there=E2=80=99s general consensus that reporting the issue would be great. However, as I explained before, there=E2=80=99s no clear way to do that for= two reasons: 1. Transformations apply to bags, not packages, so we cannot tell whether a transformation has an effect until after the transformed package has been lowered. Even then, it=E2=80=99s tricky. 2. In this case, this has to do with the semantics of transformations themselves: by definition, =E2=80=98with-source=E2=80=99 dismisses pat= ches. [...] > Well, I am not convinced that enforce the ordering is a good thing > because as Ludo said, some HPC user exploits this control of ordering to > generate complex transformations. My point is that there are folks who have been using package transformation options for years; any claim has to be evaluated in that light, and any change would have to be considered very carefully. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.