Re: [PATCH] Add rubygems updater.

[Pjotr Prins <pjotr.public12@thebird.nl>]

On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 09:18:54PM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote:
> I think we should update the package definitions so that more have
> tests, and failing that import the library so we know it can at
> least be loaded, like this:
> 
> +     `(#:phases
> +       (modify-phases %standard-phases
> +         (replace 'check
> +           (lambda _
> +             (zero? (system* "ruby" "-Ilib" "-r" "ansi")))))))

That is a good idea. When gems lack tests, either they don't have
them, or the authors don't add them to gems. We can try and request
upstream or add the tests ourselves.

> I would prefer to do this testing in an environment where only the propagated inputs are loaded, but I'm not sure how to do this. But I digress.
> 
> Do you think it would be a good idea to provide a "bleeding edge" repository so that users can more easily help with testing? Perhaps also a branch that only updates according to semantic versioning?

That may be interesting, at least to a Ruby specific audience.

> 
> >
> >What is useful is to generate (export) an updated package using the
> >old one as an input. Or show a diff of version + SHA. That way it
> >becomes reasonably easy to update packages.
> I'm not sure what you mean. guix refresh has the --update flag,
> which updates the version and source SHA hash in the source code -
> useful.

You just taught me something :)

Pj.