From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp10.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:306:2d92::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms9.migadu.com with LMTPS id gNVwOTMa72SFUQAAG6o9tA:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:30:12 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:306:2d92::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp10.migadu.com with LMTPS id gNVwOTMa72SFUQAAG6o9tA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:30:12 +0200 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6A4C5B65C for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:30:11 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=envs.net header.s=modoboa header.b="BQ/BP2FR"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1693391411; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=s96uaXGrBXnJkQwjlioxv75PXKyejZEBf0gwytGSKIo=; b=XxCwrfll03aOGyozQgDSOUIBJw6eaQuB+Ud+fCFX4y08gzhPYJa/JRm0VWNqoAQsRJ7k5/ LHSyHBBRdZ+qlFd+9BJWIDrLLQFDF75vPRHmwo2xbqNv/eqrZx6dcLfm7ehrhu0+seqiEk aSVwWQ6Q5JcygkGCqGQCCTH0QIYL19EVAhf+QdqsFWOnRnNOmGEOj+1ZGf5XDWOfZJppIY WkhkO+q09wkRDw+bPQ+aaj5XtVzeIwghywhbdJU53cDKLzADu38AScyba8zLi0nuYV4StZ nuQXwrWKOHe9JN7VEZ/9Ef2+6r67YpucMgPrndgAyAXxng8dJiimGYKMIj8DcA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1693391411; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Av470Ivb5N/f7jjY0AAstJCKA9CWDbfzHyUthVPkABZkqEzbNmGcE/EZI6dO60m/roixHq xqE+H0Bkel1Ax0I1aSMhx+NOqD0OVGNZgGIaxItnXRMcGRkddBnziBzxXiltCyf+EBNMQy jZM8MvceeogOvS6MyHmKQNzZFw6Vj5nXTLYwo+tH1NGLGzUSGq6FvbupXGDdgBXwWdUVwN ZNXFSpN0sR+YwS2jJG5B5tRdCCRijXPxF2j2CzoAwzM1eFlX1J7PSgzfI6VmRTCJHbh+jC RG3eDLsHKwCuWgKku98a2d2VTavlnk10hVzlNyIKM+xF5ZjqUY0D9ssTk9ZJiw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=envs.net header.s=modoboa header.b="BQ/BP2FR"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbIST-0005Hs-SP; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 06:29:57 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbISR-0005Hf-5I for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 06:29:55 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qbISQ-00032N-Tc for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 06:29:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qbISY-0003Q0-Cf for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 06:30:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#65391: Acknowledgement (People need to report failing builds even though we have ci.guix.gnu.org for that) Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 65391 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Maxime Devos Cc: Andy Tai , Bruno Victal , Csepp , Maxim Cournoyer , 65391@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 65391-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B65391.169339134913037 (code B ref 65391); Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:30:02 +0000 Received: (at 65391) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Aug 2023 10:29:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52191 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qbIRg-0003OD-JT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 06:29:08 -0400 Received: from mail.envs.net ([5.199.136.28]:59328) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qbIRb-0003Nq-Lr for 65391@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 06:29:06 -0400 Received: from localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1]) by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51C138A013B; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:28:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=envs.net; s=modoboa; t=1693391333; bh=s96uaXGrBXnJkQwjlioxv75PXKyejZEBf0gwytGSKIo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BQ/BP2FRmBtjIuI6E38bfmMJCBkxUTIGb5PNnsnsmdvU1Nv8Cx9KBq2oyWES9cLkV YF4a78tyG0mvyPYuJcqNq+G88zfCcLoPcfXwny0nDEjo9JvEvIMbzcbj+N8hwc7iB0 hB94u9FRT2BY28gxE7UMdtpajKIbUm8SLfH2aHF5Mfea6Tf1TNDE80WxKszb9fY4ml o4G4t+tuaxvPSHVs3lbsftrXs7I7KcFvwPaGE+2RcfNB6yCDahRlhO283I8cv4Pkge smuCRKkE7IM2ktovKRtDqRXcN1BuLzvQPNIhD8Bv5TmhHT3LI7BovYHkdiSwMlshmo Qr5JZeZghh26Wk4dDkcQd8LqcG1OYTmLKuo7uOnven3DGwjjmKss0bPEQ8lF7o/vsb cMqs6JVAobZ42IBNK8mFLxzHyz1cYv0QtHYLhqyg0+D989+TwgvWROf13AtsvCpJ9u 684gMeDF/zivug8bq/5Tk15sb//nrdLMFcVSkDSIgZXyI0Z7846LQ5cD8gX8CB6gFm +IqmOrxZpbm5Ep+EFYfigJTVsfV4tKF0P2mdJQMO3T+mJ2dZbqNT0h0osbmgJEy0L5 3WHIXRhYy22Fuo5yTJfRbE8jCgi2qOaStBzEA1gZHRpFGG9gFXn7UodcvXbAFxVFyl Fhf6vgvzF8CgDygL4ywqB0YI= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.envs.net Received: from mail.envs.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.envs.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id AsaoCoyAZEMk; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:28:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [36.170.58.199]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.envs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:28:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [local]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 43b206c8; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 10:29:00 +0000 (UTC) References: <295ef8c8-574a-4169-98f3-6d9aaeb773f1@telenet.be> <6a62aced-9138-0496-fb01-d5d8e89ba8d6@telenet.be> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 18:29:00 +0800 In-Reply-To: <6a62aced-9138-0496-fb01-d5d8e89ba8d6@telenet.be> (Maxime Devos's message of "Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:03:22 +0200") Message-ID: <87edjkvn6b.fsf@envs.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-to: =?UTF-8?Q?=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6?= From: =?UTF-8?Q?=E5=AE=8B=E6=96=87=E6=AD=A6?= via Bug reports for GNU Guix Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -5.22 X-Spam-Score: -5.22 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: C6A4C5B65C X-Migadu-Scanner: mx2.migadu.com X-TUID: feoV/LB41d68 Maxime Devos writes: >> Maybe we can automatically report the failures as bugs, say every 7 >> days, and remove a package if it still fail to build in 90 days? > > The first part looks reasonable to me (though I would decrease 7 days > to daily or even hourly, as I don't see a point in the delay), but how > does the second part (removing packages) make sense at all? > Oh, to be more clear I didn't mean automatically remove a package, but notify guix-devel to consider removing one if its "fail to build" issue had existed for a long time and no one care. > [...] > > Instead, what about: > >> Maybe we can automatically report the failures as bugs, say every >> hour, and revert the commit(s) causing the new build failures if they >> haven't been fixed in a week. Yes, automatically report bugs would be helpful. And I'll leave the reverting rights to committers, which usually need some research and maybe risky. > [...] > Expanding upon this a bit more: > > * Expecting that people fix build failures of X when updating X seems > reasonable to me, and I think this is not in dispute. > > * Expecting that people using X fix build failures of X or risk the > package X being deleted when someone else changed a dependency Y of > X seems unreasonable to me. More generally, I am categorically > opposed to: > > =E2=80=98If you change something and it breaks something else, you s= hould > leave fixing the something else to someone (unless you want to > fix it yourself).=E2=80=99 > > (I can think of some situations where this is a good thing, but not > in general and in particular not in this Guix situation.) > > I mean, I don't know about you, but for me it fails the categorical > imperative and the so-called Golden Rule. I agree. Well sometimes if breaks are overlooked by me, then it's very welcome for other to give me a hand. Thanks.