From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp11.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms5.migadu.com with LMTPS id qB/zA7RovWI1HQEAbAwnHQ (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:11:16 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp11.migadu.com with LMTPS id qCoGBLRovWIHCAEA9RJhRA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:11:16 +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 ACE90A771 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:11:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50850 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o6qCg-0002iW-TG for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 05:11:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47700) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o6qCO-0002h0-EZ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 05:11:00 -0400 Received: from albert.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:110:4::f00:1a]:53410) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o6qCJ-0002Wu-TQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 05:10:56 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a]) by albert.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id pMAo270034UW6Th06MAoZh; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:10:48 +0200 Message-ID: <1c4a02681ff703c44741355d2ac6b1615ee44713.camel@telenet.be> Subject: Re: Shall updaters fall back to other updaters? From: Maxime Devos To: Hartmut Goebel , guix-devel Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:10:42 +0200 In-Reply-To: <71902b16-4c29-c2f3-c99b-c103f3f6647c@crazy-compilers.com> References: <71902b16-4c29-c2f3-c99b-c103f3f6647c@crazy-compilers.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-UFqXEDr4FC2ymn2Hbbzn" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22; t=1656580248; bh=JabnFBUEvU9I8U904EygTtQopPeY3XUirIbxNls09V0=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=hFxP2xNxPouC73M/Tlw4UzmcdaDlcpuP8wnAmrPxPG6peZvKHHhJRTP2ZYJY4NwbA P09+D/3eovQ+JMwdb2yA4b6wvJFY/MDWlS/9eDruj6IEh80BOlciYuQltfU0bsJx/y UmV0GozJZcbmJPAEwsQVyLl3G1YBLDDx5Ro3wyig2goCtvt+W93UMTjLpuK8NjgH/w MoldWUdHqh8PL/3W+dXH2WCldU1Fim7c1Stc/8GHTYP8TBoCyUJuJPhN5L09PYBBL7 E6hfitU0U7sKG14FYXk+jxR4HdpVLPtgQlEBEDjijZB5HalgBUW9PuBxmOqjAydZdM t4+gQGXgZHWfg== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:110:4::f00:1a; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=albert.telenet-ops.be X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-To: larch@yhetil.org X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1656580275; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=JabnFBUEvU9I8U904EygTtQopPeY3XUirIbxNls09V0=; b=mJdIXeNKFGZXqqGBrzPWo5Sp12d6Z+Jj7xnwpgc48GCiuhLxNb8N6SbutBP2Viq4EC5bI6 53hxYpbVWS46f1AIsxhf4mbLUvmGH/AThL19jBNI0wwg9yCU9XgycEWe4KVGbK3iapbCQG s4BN+e9Tt2WNmYOs1Y1W63LcbUOQeK7O7HvXnFxsT5JZibUGcSJzo9xq4ZWOIiBbc4xr2+ Dwu6m7VElKmjOVSu6D9REhDYksNs4lmZbBpwo7s0H1EUmxl2aIIdk0UH1gaTwNixeMWRgJ QQ3Zrlq/gO0UBocoX5oLcnHZ383ioSWc81GvQhvKTkhMfwBrdY63H1yJDNQG3A== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1656580275; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=iB3fwLt5+6ZkadI7riayigWC9utJf+d0SzwpphhZeOK6sNcDfUdCgObbQoUFLatZy2x2Wz tCGfoeL4AvsYZ6LHwZ3bdh8bbOTLdu62+HfpqUDeuFKC57TY0kQP2lryx5tmGGTBlNnNgs 3Z5eu7KMD8afVxXB3xIXi4QN2avnh12t/MhHvMA570Wat3bsM8FZI8eNbONN2YoEGd2OxN rEI4EiaEaaL/cobSgOBc03MV0Jv8/U+cugChr0yGuG3N+ihhhX9Xvl7jNEPKILlA1Lzzc0 r1kQXBWL/PRMbMmmcaFKLyPsGXwn+At4l8ZCUwPNYFyuYKifoxOKpvURXMF38g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r22 header.b=hFxP2xNx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -10.35 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r22 header.b=hFxP2xNx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: ACE90A771 X-Spam-Score: -10.35 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: 7SsKqooDAUHW --=-UFqXEDr4FC2ymn2Hbbzn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hartmut Goebel schreef op do 30-06-2022 om 10:58 [+0200]: > Hi, >=20 > while working on refreshing to a specific version (see=20 > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2022-06/msg00222.html) I= =20 > discovered that the updaters fall back to another updater. Is this intend= ed? >=20 > Concrete example (using refresh to a specific version): Package "xlsxio"= =20 > has no version 0.2.30. When trying to refresh to this version, the=20 > github updater comes first and of course fails to get this version. Then= =20 > the generic-git updater is triggered and tries to get the version. >=20 > IMHO each package should be handled by a single updater. I think that, in the absence of pre-existing knowledge which updater is the right one, trying out several until we get the =E2=80=98right=E2=80=99 = one is reasonable. However, to avoid non-determinism, some CPU time, some I/O and messiness, I think that somehow annotating packages to write down _which_ updater applies would be reasonable (maybe with some defaults, e.g. for minetest mods, ContentDB would be considered authoritive) Anyway, this idea of =E2=80=98authoritive updaters=E2=80=99 as it has been = raised before (I think by Liliana, in the context of the Minetest updater and generic-git), but I couldn't find the mail again. Greetings, Maxime. --=-UFqXEDr4FC2ymn2Hbbzn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYr1okhccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7oDVAP4k3xB3AdBQC45qY9UqzyR/nH4G p4E92GiAwiIOsGMPwAEA8CTXeYo0SYNT8OvwkJEF/6KyotNQIT2mR5fA0ziGLgw= =FIFy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-UFqXEDr4FC2ymn2Hbbzn--