GNU bug report logs - #74987
[PATCH 0/2] Some dependencies for julia-setfield

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 74987 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 74987 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu>
To: "King, Spencer via Guix-patches via" <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] Some dependencies for julia-setfield
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 23:12:05 +0000

Hello,

This patch series begins adding some of the dependencies necessary for building julia-setfield and running its test cases. There were a couple of test cases I was having issues with so I decided to just submit the dependency patches for now and finalize julia-setfield at a later date.

Best,
Spencer

Message #8 received at 74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu>
To: "74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add julia-performancetesttools.
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 23:30:05 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[0001-gnu-Add-julia-performancetesttools.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #11 received at 74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu>
To: "74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: Add julia-staticnumbers.
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 23:31:04 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[0002-gnu-Add-julia-staticnumbers.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #14 received at 74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: "King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu>
Cc: 74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#74987] [PATCH 0/2] Some dependencies for julia-setfield
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 16:08:46 +0100

Hi,

"King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu> skribis:

> This patch series begins adding some of the dependencies necessary for
> building julia-setfield and running its test cases. There were a
> couple of test cases I was having issues with so I decided to just
> submit the dependency patches for now and finalize julia-setfield at a
> later date.

Nice.  Applied as well, thanks!

It’s good to see the Julia package set grow.  I must say though that I
wonder about longer-term maintenance.

For example, I gave a first stab at upgrading Julia but then ran out of
time: <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/73197>.

The other issue is that of individual package upgrades.  So far it seems
to be pretty smooth, but I suspect it won’t last.

What’s your take?

Ludo’.

Message #19 received at 74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: "74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#74987] [PATCH 0/2] Some dependencies for julia-setfield
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 21:38:36 +0000

Hi Ludo, 

Thank you for being so prompt when it comes to reviewing my patches, I really do appreciate it. I'm happy to help the Julia package set grow. All of my Julia contributions so far have been working towards packaging some of the larger machine learning packages that I use, which have pretty deep dependency trees.

I agree that longer-term maintenance is a point of concern. Perhaps that will change if Julia begins to see more widespread adoption. I think one of the biggest issues facing Julia packaging is that there currently isn't the same level of interest as languages like Python. I also know that there have been some issues with packages not building reproducibly due to upstream issues with the internals of the Julia compiler, but I'm not going to pretend I have an in-depth understanding of that issue.

I have seen your thread about your efforts to package a new version of Julia. It looks pretty complex and is definitely a major step up in complexity from any packages I've written so far. I think this comes back to the issue of interest, Julia just doesn't have the same level of interest as other languages in scientific computing so it can be challenging to find collaborators.

Like you said, individual package upgrades have gone fine so far. I've done a few myself without issues. I agree that it probably won't last as the package set grows and we end up with more complex dependency trees. However, I imagine that is a similar issue faced by other package sets in Guix.

Best,
Spencer

Message #22 received at 74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: "King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu>
Cc: "74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <74987 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>,
 Nicolas Graves <ngraves <at> ngraves.fr>
Subject: Re: [bug#74987] [PATCH 0/2] Some dependencies for julia-setfield
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 12:38:55 +0100

Hi Spencer,

"King, Spencer" <spencer.king <at> wustl.edu> skribis:

> I agree that longer-term maintenance is a point of concern. Perhaps
> that will change if Julia begins to see more widespread adoption. I
> think one of the biggest issues facing Julia packaging is that there
> currently isn't the same level of interest as languages like Python. I
> also know that there have been some issues with packages not building
> reproducibly due to upstream issues with the internals of the Julia
> compiler, but I'm not going to pretend I have an in-depth
> understanding of that issue.
>
> I have seen your thread about your efforts to package a new version of
> Julia. It looks pretty complex and is definitely a major step up in
> complexity from any packages I've written so far. I think this comes
> back to the issue of interest, Julia just doesn't have the same level
> of interest as other languages in scientific computing so it can be
> challenging to find collaborators.
>
> Like you said, individual package upgrades have gone fine so far. I've
> done a few myself without issues. I agree that it probably won't last
> as the package set grows and we end up with more complex dependency
> trees. However, I imagine that is a similar issue faced by other
> package sets in Guix.

Fortunately, Julia is less of a nice today than it was a few years back.
Hopefully we’ll find more people to help.

Regarding long-term maintenance, have you looked at the importer that
was proposed a while back?  (Cc’ing Nicolas.)

  https://issues.guix.gnu.org/62202

I think we try and have an importer and updater in place to ease package
maintenance.  Maybe the ‘juliahub’ importer (it seemed almost ready to
me), or maybe something else.  It’s been instrumental in maintaining
other package sets.

Thanks for your feedback,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

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