[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Agreeing on some "rules" for packaging.

From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: Agreeing on some "rules" for packaging.
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 14:51:29 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.130007 (Ma Gnus v0.7) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)

Cyril Roelandt <address@hidden> skribis:

> At the GHM, a Fedora hacker (whose name I forgot) suggested that it
> might be time for us to write down some "rules" as to how packaging
> should be done.

Sounds like a good idea.  In general, when working in a group, I think
it’s better to discuss what our expectations are, and write as much of
it down, to avoid any misunderstandings or frustration.  So yes, let’s
do it.

> For instance, Andreas suggested that patches should only be used if we
> think they might be applied upstream, thus keeping the patches/
> directory as small as possible;

Agreed.  Also, patches should start with a comment saying what they do,
and possibly what their upstream status is (submitted, will never be
submitted because it’s Guix-specific, etc.); perhaps the format of that
comment could even be formalized.

> modifications specific to Guix should be written in Scheme.

Sometimes that may be hard or inconvenient though, so I would not set
that in stone.

> I would also like to define a standard way to order the "#:use-module"
> at the beginning of each file, and agree on other "cosmetic" rules.

Not convinced about the ordering.  ;-)

> What do you think ?

These are good examples of the kind of rules we may want to discuss and

What about discussing them as patches for the “Packaging Guidelines”
section of the manual, for example?  (With one thread per suggestion.)



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]