Subject: Re: [bug#60042] What to call pinned package versions

From: Simon Tournier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 14:19:36 +0100

Hi,

On Mon, 09 Jan 2023 at 11:32, Simon Tournier <[email-masked]> wrote:

>  + Option a.
>
> version-control.scm:673:(define-public git-minimal/fixed -> git-minimal/pinned

[...]

>  + Option b.
>
> onc-rpc.scm:91:         (define libtirpc/fixed          -> libtirpc/grafted

[...]

>  + Option c. = option a. + option b. (remove reference to /fixed)
>
>
> From my point of view, option a. is the less “disruptive” because for
> instance we use the term “Fixes“ in commit message when a bug is indeed
> fixed.

Well, we also have another option:

   + Option d.: the version in the symbol; as in htslib-1.14.

   Considering the initial example,

     git-minimal/fixed    ->    git-minimal-2.33.1

This option d. appears to me the best:

 + it avoids ambiguity.

 + it is explicit – no need to grep for finding which version
 git-minimal/pinned refers to when reading Julia package recipes.

 + we are already doing that for multi-version packages.

Moreover, a ’default’ property could be also assigned to default
version (here the package defined by the symbol git-minimal).  And it
would allow to have less surprise when some multi versions package are
exported or incorrectly hidden.  See #60200 [1].

WDYT?

If we agree on Option d., then I could prepare a patch set and document
in the manual.  Let me know. :-)

1: <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/[email-masked]>

Cheers,
simon