From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id IHmiCjm08GVFRQEAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:53 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id IHmiCjm08GVFRQEAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:53 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=dismail.de header.s=20190914 header.b=o6TOIox2; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1710273593; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=BNbtyWAOx3YW4uqjAZQFb5Pc/1dgmhN5vlE3aeUbmLKzJNGdWkdX/FjOsFJN14Ps0TvVqz QqsKMumA6A9kNaxD92XgOimDiHGjb0fZlaoqMFeY2JUsF8rb7jLwHwh3ZQS/i2W/omCVxm 3IFcEBcWv9QIwkeHWYwlcCsDrDInjqPaaHO+fWDcIe7EUUv0Tmmg0OmWfL6M+GpFoFqfO/ j7u1fNREQIX6S2HtoNRqvAn2riEv3osSe0dHZBYZ3bJ2/U/Ii6fib4iX5tICrgPn3DDwhT be6w5eD3U6z5++ojtzPGuhZIkgW/8Se8089XL+5/IRNodkeom7fjj2izLzaxHg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=dismail.de header.s=20190914 header.b=o6TOIox2; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1710273593; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=OHvJThLXTgllDFL1QDywFeO/7tdE5IG/8WCxTkJEWso=; b=dWdVnBqaeXL60q5KY7BTDuYI89rsOHDv2caH1GUcvd3fRoNvU6zqy7aHjQYDk2BUWVoNP4 +pum+MbpKTC0oIPT9UqVxHuu44FpUBCag/ETA+EtvPQd6OgrK6NL+vespVkdkUeLCuBEKa hVYbSvTO3hgrz07DuMt1c5F50naNI3o/GJ0he6tgwdTkAQ395pKowP9ymlNvrJ2Cjbb+NQ EboYjK7DM4NIAHaFU6Br1suWeHFmj+aASCYvCG3gvlXjNLcW4M4dsZQvLziaeE+hVdMsUU e+QLzrhlLJp1kZmHADNL0nXN9JZWJ5/zI78W+5KNktEI4r19Zab6pkfep2psGw== 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 06593267F3 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rk8Hb-0003ao-19; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:59:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rk8HZ-0003aT-5p for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:59:29 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rk8HY-0007Ez-Bg for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:59:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rk8I6-0008UI-Lp for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 16:00:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#55728] Handling expensive packages Resent-From: jbranso@dismail.de Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:00:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 55728 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: "Skyler Ferris" , guix-devel@gnu.org, peter@polidoro.io, 55728@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 55728-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B55728.171027359032579 (code B ref 55728); Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:00:02 +0000 Received: (at 55728) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2024 19:59:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43893 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rk8Ht-0008TN-W7 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:59:50 -0400 Received: from mx1.dismail.de ([78.46.223.134]:16083) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rk8Hr-0008T8-Dn for 55728@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:59:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.dismail.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 4915a85f; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:05 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=dismail.de; h= mime-version:date:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from :message-id:subject:to:in-reply-to:references; s=20190914; bh=T7 606OcL8deYs7CgiVEyMqvlRhztW7Z6UnbM7ZhsJ+k=; b=o6TOIox2EtYyouWelS A3OFEws3VFSnmQfoeKkuMA3xxhJIP360chZqjBhrTCRdE25OQuCHaf/JF2LglFjs As/c4qnPNU0yOaC8iKb4gTB8rkqCjSSut1BVnDplQ7Sn75PSNzkyPIYjfWJD4g6h m9LQ5j/gdaJ+WUPp2bK6By8e0FLz86Feqz2e8cAfIIvTapRsYHL01ekqJF9gXuok v7QhMA5qABUA27GjCgwZljAsdB0vM3JbVIlsHcB/qXRBNNJ1Zbm44uvT0NLooSiG NWmLL+K9ETz1r0MZ5Bf1ZBUqZRz7BalmQQSsK8w6RQDVbulE6x2Digl3tgwZFxQ9 nkWQ== Received: from smtp2.dismail.de ( [10.240.26.12]) by mx1.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 96bd9afc; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp2.dismail.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 42cd2b50; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by dismail.de (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 9f081869 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:59:04 +0100 (CET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 19:59:04 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <4d42f1c112461bd6bb81420b9794c027d1f2e139@dismail.de> TLS-Required: No In-Reply-To: References: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-to: jbranso@dismail.de X-ACL-Warn: , jbranso--- via Guix-patches From: jbranso--- via Guix-patches via Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Scanner: mx10.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -6.89 X-Spam-Score: -6.89 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 06593267F3 X-TUID: rQt+1S6nkV+n Hey Peter! Your patch found its way on onto the guix devel list! Thanks for contributing to guix! We want to add your patch, and we are w= ondering what your motivation was for sending this patch? Is your patch = a prerequisite for a package you want to add? Or do you have some other = reason? Thanks, Joshua https://gnucode.me March 11, 2024 at 3:06 PM, "Skyler Ferris" wrote= : >=20 >=20Hello, >=20=20 >=20 I am looking through the backlog of open patch submissions https://i= ssues.guix.gnu.org/search?query=3Dis%3Aopen+tag%3Apatch to see if any ar= e actionable on my end. One such patch is issue 55728 which updates pytho= n-mock https://issues.guix.gnu.org/55728 . Based on the output of `guix r= efresh --list-dependent python-mock | wc`, this will impact more than 200= 0 packages. While this submission is very old, neither the master nor pyt= hon-team branches have updated this package yet. In section 22.8.2 "Manag= ing Patches and Branches" https://guix.gnu.org/en/manual/devel/en/html_no= de/Managing-Patches-and-Branches.html , there is a recommendation that ch= anges which effect more than 300 dependents are added to a different bran= ch for testing. >=20=20 >=20 These dependents presumably still work, as there are not 2000 build = failures or a flood of related bug reports. So I think it would make sens= e to first ask the submitter for their motivation for sending the patch (= for example, it might be a prerequisite for a package they want to add an= d they did not send it as a series for some reason). Depending on their r= esponse it might make sense to do something other than apply the update a= s given (for example, by providing both versions of the package so that a= new package can be added without impacting existing branches). But there= also might be some reason why it makes sense to apply the update everywh= ere (for example, if significant optimizations in the update reduces buil= d times for all of the dependent packages). >=20=20 >=20 So my main question is whether or not people agree that it makes sen= se to ask the submitter for more information and take no other action at = this time. And as a secondary question, if it does make sense to update t= he package everywhere is there anything actionable on my end? >=20=20 >=20 Regards, > Skyler >