Subject: Re: [gnome-team] What should we do with the "gnome" package?

From: Vivien Kraus <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 12:10:10 +0100

Dear Guix,

Le dimanche 07 janvier 2024 à 17:53 +0100, Liliana Marie Prikler a
écrit :
> I've summarised our TODOs below: Each commented line (preceded by #)
> denotes a package that doesn't exist on the gnome-team branch yet.
> 
> core:atkmm:2.28.3:
Oops, I missed that one. Sorry. I checked the list by comparing our
versions to those of the list, but of course, our version of "atkmm" is
reported as 2.36.2, so I did not think further. 

The git log shows various documentation update, build system updates,
and documentation updates between 2.28.1 and 2.28.3.

> #core:calls:44.2:
(as said on IRC, I believe we have Calls already on gnome-team)

> core:font-abattis-cantarell:0.303.1:
I don’t know where this 0.303.1 tag comes from, I can’t see it. It’s
neither a tag nor a gitlab release. There has only been translation
updates for the appstream metadata since our commit.

> core:epiphany:44.7:
We now have it, thank you!

> #core:gnome-logs:43.0:
The day elogind supports the journald API, we will be delighted to have
it (also see https://issues.guix.gnu.org/67338 ).

> #core:gnome-software:44.5:
I thought it was pointless to package it, but see
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/68228 : it is claimed that we can use it to
install flatpaks.

> #core:gnome-tour:44.0:
That’s Rust, unfortunately.

> 
> I think we should settle on what to do with the gnome package soon to
> not stall the branch even further.  We can already start working
> towards GNOME 46 after the merge :)
In my opinion, we should have atkmm:2.28.3, but I see atkmm-2.28 being
used as a propagated-inputs for gtkmm-3, and gtkmm-3 is an input for
inkscape. That’s a world rebuild…

For Cantarell fonts, maybe we should point to the latest commit? That’s
another world rebuild though, and for very little gain as of now.

I’m not sure a flatpak-only gnome software is a hard requirement. It
would be most confusing. Gnome-tour is nice, but I think we can live
without it until we figure out this “rust” stuff.

> There is some gnome-adjacent software (particularly extensions, I
> don't
> want all of them to break like they did the last time and the time
> before) to have a look at as well before the merge

You mean, the gnome-shell-extension-* in (gnu packages gnome-xyz)? I
don’t use them (I was told they were frequently broken so I never
bothered to try them!) so I’m not sure I can reliably tell whether they
work correctly.

Best regards,

Vivien

P.S. After a brief period of not being able to send an e-mail, this is
the first I send with my new email-key-rotation-service-type! I hope it
travels safely to your inbox.
https://labo.planete-kraus.eu/email-key-rotation.git/tree/README.org