Re: Proposal: nss updates

[Ian Eure]

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Ian Eure <ian@retrospec.tv> writes:
>
> > Felix Lechner <felix.lechner@lease-up.com> writes:
> >
> > > Hi Ian,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 01 2024, Ian Eure wrote:
> > >
> > > > if you have strong feelings about -next vs. -latest
> > >
> > > How about nss-rapid?  It provides the clue about what was 
> > > packaged
> > > to
> > > someone who knows libnss.
> >
> > I like it.  I’ll update the package descriptions to make this 
> > clear as
> > well.
>
> Thanks for the explanations regarding the ESR and rapid release 
> channels
> of distribution for NSS.  I don't feel strongly about it, but 
> the
> '-latest' prefix is a bit easier to grok for someone not 
> acquainted with
> libnss.

I don’t have a strong preference either way, but lean towards 
calling it -rapid, as it matches the upstream terminology.  The 
package descriptions can disambiguate this, ex. adding "(ESR)" or 
similar to nss.

The recent 3.101.1 NSS release is an ESR, per the relesae 
notes[1].  What’s the process for getting that update into Guix? 
Since it’ll cause many rebuilds, it needs to go into a branch 
first.  core-updates seems like a reasonable place for it -- do I 
just send a patch and use prose to indicate that it should land in 
core-updates instead of master?  Or if I perform the work on the 
core-updates branch, do the patches indicate that when emailed?

Thanks,

 — Ian

[1]: 
https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/security/nss/releases/nss_3_101_1.html