Re: Merging core-updates?

[John Kehayias]

Hi guix-devel!

On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 03:49 PM, Josselin Poiret wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:
>
>> I volunteer to follow your lead, but also have no clue what is actually
>> expected.
>
> I would also like to give a hand!
>

Count me in as well!

I only did some spot fixes the last round, but at least I have some familiarity 
with what happened. I don't have any particular expertise but I'm happy to help 
coordinate overall, test, and generally do some cat herding.

And now that I have commit access I hope I can really help move things through 
with review and pushing ready patches. Unfortunately had some other stuff come 
up for the last few months since I got access, but I should have more time 
starting in a week or so.

On that front, I think looking through relevant core-updates patches (the Mesa 
ones in particular, for me) is a good first step for review and I'll try 
building on my end to see how far I get.

>> [...]
>> Actually I am wondering whether the first step of killing these untamed
>> non-feature branches would not be to build and merge staging? It is based
>> on master, supposed to contain only medium sized changes, but which I
>> suspect end up being a world-rebuilding cluster of changes.
>
> You're right, for this to smoothly transition into the "feature branch
> workflow" (if that's actually what we want to do) I guess we also need
> to lay out a plan first, and prepare for the post-c.u-merge
> world. Getting rid of staging first could be an easier exercise,
> followed by c-u. I was planning on taking your notes of the Guix days
> and opening a discussion about how we could concretely transition to
> this new workflow, I can maybe do that this evening.
>

I need to catch up on the thread about feature branches and I'm looking forward 
to that as well. It has something that I have long wanted and will gladly help 
in that transition and doing what I can to make that go smoothly.

John