[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#43427] [PATCH] gnu: zstd: Update to 1.4.5.
From: |
Greg Hogan |
Subject: |
[bug#43427] [PATCH] gnu: zstd: Update to 1.4.5. |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Sep 2020 07:22:52 -0400 |
Thanks, T-G-R. I will endeavor to tag for staging and core-updates going
forward. Not sure how I missed the prior commit. I may have been looking among
patches. Not sure how I missed the git log, and in the future I will be certain
to simply check the latest version from each branch.
Would it be feasible to have `guix refresh` consider staging and core-updates
when reporting available updates?
Greg
> On Sep 22, 2020, at 5:59 AM, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr> wrote:
>
> Greg,
>
> Mathieu Othacehe 写道:
>> The update is already present on core-updates branch,
>
> Sorry for the duplicate work! How were you to've known this, you ask?
>
> $ guix refresh --list-dependent PACKAGE
>
> or ‘-l’ for short will list the number of rebuilds that a hash change in
> PACKAGE would trigger.
>
> If it's higher than 300, the patch belongs on the ‘staging’ or ‘core-updates’
> branches instead of ‘master’. The exact numbers are in the ‘Submitting
> Patches’ section of the Guix manual.
>
> In practice, it's not always clear-cut. A patch that rebuilds fewer than 300
> packages but includes IceCat, Ungoogled Chromium, and LibreOffice probably
> belongs on ‘staging’ regardless. A patch that rebuilds 350 (fast-building)
> Perl packages might be OK for master.
>
> It's good practice to include the branch name (e.g., ‘[PATCH core-updates]’)
> when submitting patches not suitable for master.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> T G-R