[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: guile-bash updated source url

From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: guile-bash updated source url
Date: Fri, 03 May 2019 15:56:03 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux)

Hello David,

address@hidden skribis:

> This is my first contribution to guix and it's just a minor fix for
> the guile-bash package which had an outdated source url. I was able to
> retrieve the same revision of the package via the software-heritage
> project's website and upload it to gitlab. Then I installed it
> successfully via guix package -f my-guile-bash.scm using the gitlab
> url, then copied it to the existing guile-xyz.scm in gnu/packages.


> --- a/gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm
> @@ -294,23 +294,21 @@ dictionary and suggesting spelling corrections.")
>      (license license:gpl3+)))
>  (define-public guile-bash
> -  ;; This project is currently retired.  It was initially announced here:
> -  ;; <>.
> -  (let ((commit "1eabc563ca5692b3e08d84f1f0e6fd2283284469")
> +    (let ((commit "49099fe6a592aa3b8001e826b939869fe5811785")
>          (revision "0"))

Why is the commit different?  Looks like it’s more than just a mirror.

If you made changes on top of the original code, that’s actually great.
However, I’d prefer to first see a patch that simply changes the URL,
not the commit and hash, and later updates to a different revision.

Does that make sense?

Andreas Enge <address@hidden> skribis:

> should the package not be retrieved automatically from Software Heritage
> with the newest Guix API? And apart from that, will it be desirable to keep
> around an unmaintained software for which the source has disappeared?

I think David is in fact suggesting that they may well be maintaining
it, which is good news IMO.  :-)


reply via email to

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