From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnunet-gtk: adds --with-gnunet to configure-flags
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 18:52:23 +0100
Message-ID: <20160309175223.GA30271@solar>
References: <87oaapx2kd.fsf@grrlz.net> <87twkh81r0.fsf@grrlz.net>
	<idjwppcx4ts.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43363)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1adiHg-0006l4-Tk
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:52:33 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1adiHc-0004u9-T5
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:52:32 -0500
Received: from mailrelay2.public.one.com ([91.198.169.125]:14435)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1adiHc-0004t9-IM
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 12:52:28 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <idjwppcx4ts.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Nils Gillmann <niasterisk@grrlz.net>

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 06:22:23PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> > Guix should provide a stable experience, but if stable means too
> > old to deliver a useable experience of an still in development
> > network, what do we suggest? I would not replace gnunet and
> > gnunet-gtk, I would just make gnunet-svn the default (gnunet will
> > default to gnunet-svn) and gnunet-0.10.1 will have to be
> > installed explicitly.
> The reply to my bug report said something similar.  If version 0.10.1 is
> so old that upstream suggest taking the latest from SVN I suppose we
> should do this too.

I would argue that if upstream cannot be bothered to make a stable release
every once in a while, this is not our business, unless there are dependent
packages that stop working.

On the other hand, as I fear that the number of users of the current gnunet 
is very limited, it probably does not hurt to update it with the version
number 0.10.1-1-xxx for some svn checkout xxx.

Andreas