GNU bug report logs - #41882
[PATCH] channels: Allow specifying per-channel --allow-downgrades in the channel file

Previous Next

Full log

Message #32 received at 41882 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Jakub Kądziołka <kuba <at> kadziolka.net>
Cc: 41882 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#41882] [PATCH] channels: Allow specifying per-channel
 --allow-downgrades in the channel file
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 22:26:22 +0200

Hi,

Jakub Kądziołka <kuba <at> kadziolka.net> skribis:

> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 09:52:38AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> How would it affect your workflow if you used merges instead of
>> rebasing?
>
> The fundamental difference would be that each merge increases the
> complexity of the branch, and as such, has a cost. Sometimes, I get
> some merge conflicts; in such a case I want to prepare a new patch that
> applies cleanly onto master, such that I can push it easily when the
> time is right.
>
> Also, the workflow of rebasing a patchstack allows me to clearly see
> which patches are yet to be upstreamed. A history with merges - not so
> much.

Yeah, agreed.

I do ./pre-inst-env for my local branches but I understand one might
prefer to use ‘guix pull’.

Hmm dunno, I think this needs more thought.

>> With authentication now in place, you probably have to do
>> this anyway, or to also disable it.
>
> I have configured git to sign all my commits, so it re-signs all the
> patches I apply each time I rebase. I admit, this only works because I
> have access to the repository itself, and as such, my key is authorized.

OK.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.