From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dylan Jeffers Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add python-pypump Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:17:57 -0700 Message-ID: <20160815151757.51f21eed@openmailbox.org> References: <20160812183129.0f76b28a@openmailbox.org> <20160813125700.GA12089@jasmine> <20160813123242.6162b166@openmailbox.org> <20160813230714.GA22289@jasmine> <20160814160711.5c87d31e@openmailbox.org> <20160815184128.GA11573@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43439) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZQDO-0004vt-8p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:18:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZQDK-0002u8-AM for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:18:38 -0400 Received: from mail2.openmailbox.org ([62.4.1.33]:39463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZQDK-0002sj-0d for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 18:18:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160815184128.GA11573@jasmine> 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+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 14:41:28 -0400 Leo Famulari wrote: > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 04:07:11PM -0700, Dylan Jeffers wrote: > > > The latest upstream version 0.7. Is there a reason not to use the > > > latest version in this case? > > > > For my immediate purposes, I need pypump 0.6, since thats the > > version used in my projects. Since the versions are quite > > different, maybe we include both of them? > > I think we should package the latest version, at least. > > Maybe we could also package 0.6 with a package 'python-pypump-0.6' > that inherits from python-pypump. Or, you could keep that inherited > python-pypump-0.6 in a private package repo, and use > GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH. > > I'd prefer the latter option. I don't think we have a precedent of > adding old releases, although we do sometimes keep them around for > compatibility. But I could be mistaken. > > What do people think we should do? Yes I agree with the second alternative as well. Dylan