Re: A proposal of a consistent set of clear rules and guidelines involving snippets, phases and patches.

[Maxime Devos]

On 25-07-2022 07:21, Julien Lepiller wrote:
> I don't like the wording at all. You're mixing too many things together.
Feel free to try to separate the things, but going previous discussions, 
many tings are important, and they appear all to be inseparable.
> I think it would be better to first document the guiding principles 
> (eg. the goal that there are no non-free software in Guix, going for 
> the simplest thing, etc) and then derive rules for specific cases, 
> based on these principles:
>
> How do I remove non-free software? -> snippet because …
>
> How do I remove bundled libraries? -> snippet or phase because …
>
> How do I fix a build issue? -> patch or snippet if this affects 
> building from source, can also be a phase if the result of --sources 
> can still build
>
> A test issue?
>
> …
>
> This leaves some cases up to interpretation, but that's probably not 
> so different from "it's not an absolute rule". It's also much clearer 
> and quicker to figure out in which case you are. If not documented as 
> a case, you can fall back to the general principles.

TBC, is the issue here the structure of the section, or some individual 
rules? In the former case, I could try rewriting it a bit to follow your 
proposed structure.

Greetings,
Maxime.

OpenPGP_0x49E3EE22191725EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature