GNU bug report logs - #74137
[PATCH] gnu: Add emacs-vi-tilde-fringe.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail <at> nicolasgoaziou.fr>
To: Rostislav Svoboda <rostislav.svoboda <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e+guix <at> gmail.com>, Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>, 74137 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Andrew Tropin <andrew <at> trop.in>
Subject: [bug#74137] [PATCH] gnu: Add emacs-vi-tilde-fringe.
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 23:21:34 +0100

Hello,

Rostislav Svoboda <rostislav.svoboda <at> gmail.com> writes:

>> We use revision and commits to distinguish versions from plain ones, to
>> say : "be careful, we didn't package the exact 1.0 release".
>
> This is information no one can reliably depend on, as there's no
> mechanism to guarantee what you're suggesting.
>
>> I'm advocating for removing that information from the version field only.
>> We're already doing this for projects that do not tag releases. See, e.g.,
>> `emacs-inspector'.
>
> If you want to be *sure* that emacs-inspector includes no
> (modify-phases ...), you'll need to check its definition anyway.
> There's no point in hiding the commit hash.
>
> On the contrary, the commit hash is quite useful. It immediately and
> reliably indicates which commit was used to build a package.
>
> This information is particularly helpful when performing a git bisect,
> manually inspecting the /gnu/store, and similar tasks.

AFAICT, this is not what is done in Guix. Usually versions follow
upstream tags, and revisions+commits are the exception, not the rule.

You seem to have a divergent opinion on the subject. That's fair, but
I think we're at a dead end now. Since I don't want to block nor delay
this patch, I'll let others proceed with the review.

Regards,

Previous Next

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