Re: [REQ/DISCUSSION] patch managing system

[Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2530 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:52:15PM +0200, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
> On 03/21/2016 04:48 PM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> > To automate the repetitive tasks, Cyril Roelandt had started sometimes
> > ago to work on a bot that was continuously applying and building
> > incoming patches on top of master and report (by email) if things were
> > building correctly.  I think that is a good idea that could be extended
> > by providing a way to send commands to the bot like what is done for
> > Debbugs.
> 
> Yeah, it was a fun experiment. The main issue is that reading mail is
> harder than it looks. People attach patches to their mails, they send
> them using git-send-email, they attach the output of "git format-patch"
> to a regular mail, they have weird encodings, etc. That means there are
> lots of cases to tests, and lots of potential bugs. If the "patches"
> tool from QEMU does that well already, I'd be in favor of not recoding it :)
> 
> That being said, something we really need is a tool that helps us handle
> trivial update patches (basically, patches that just update the version
> and the hash of a given package). It should apply the patch and run a
> script like this one:
> 
> $ cat check-update.sh
> make || exit 1
> for pkg in $(./pre-inst-env guix refresh -l $1 | sed 's/.*: //')
> do
>         echo "[+] Rebuilding $pkg"
>         ./pre-inst-env guix build $pkg
>         if [ "$?" -ne "0" ]; then
>                 echo "[+] Rebuilding $pkg: KO"
>                 exit 1
>         else
>                 echo "[+] Rebuilding $pkg: OK"
>         fi
> done

It'd be best to have it check against hydra also, so we would know to
"not care" if a package that failed to build previously still fails to
build.

> 
> I think we could have a mailing-list dedicated to these trivial update
> patches. I'd also be in favor of splitting the mailing-list into many
> smaller ones, such as:
> - core;
> - packages;
> - trivial updates.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Cyril.
> 

I think it really comes down to if we've outgrown GNU's mailing-lists.
We have guix-devel, bugs-guix and help-guix (and guix-commits). As an
interm suggestion we might do better with tagging the subject line with
what it is. The gnunet patches were much easier to find with the [PATCH]
tag.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   אפרים פלשנר
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]