From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Woodcroft Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add khmer. Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 21:59:51 +1000 Message-ID: <576FC3B7.2060306@uq.edu.au> References: <1466126601-30932-1-git-send-email-donttrustben@gmail.com> <20160625172911.GD21038@jasmine> <87wplcmfua.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030704020007010807090105" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43504) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bH8jX-00039g-60 for Guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 08:00:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bH8jS-0002Lf-Vk for Guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Jun 2016 08:00:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87wplcmfua.fsf@gnu.org> 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: =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=c3=a8s?= , Leo Famulari Cc: Guix-devel@gnu.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030704020007010807090105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by newmailhub.uq.edu.au id u5QBxr2q005921 On 26/06/16 19:58, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > Leo Famulari skribis: > >> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 11:23:18AM +1000, Ben Woodcroft wrote: >>> This isn't the best name for a piece of software I suggest, but it is >>> reasonably well known in the field. >>> >>> 'murmur-hash' takes the code from a repository SMHasher, but I'm not >>> interested in packaging that. That is OK? >> I looked at the Debian package [0]. It uses the bundled copy or >> murmur-hash. Since there doesn't really seem to be an independent >> upstream distribution of murmur, I think it's fine to do the same. >> >> What do others think? > I agree. Just leave a comment explaining the situation so we can > revisit it later if the need arises. I'm not convinced, I'm afraid. According to the SMHasher README [0]: >This is the home for the MurmurHash=20 family of hash=20 functions along with the SMHasher=20 test suite used=20 to verify them. So that would count that as an independent upstream distribution of=20 murmurhash, right? Thanks, ben [0] https://github.com/aappleby/smhasher --------------030704020007010807090105 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by newmailhub.uq.edu.au id u5QBxr2q005921

On 26/06/16 19:58, Ludovic Court=C3=A8= s wrote:

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 11:23:18AM +1000, Ben Wood=
croft wrote:

This isn't the best name for a piece of software=
 I suggest, but it is
reasonably well known in the field.

'murmur-hash' takes the code from a repository SMHasher, but I'm not
interested in packaging that. That is OK?

I looked at the Debian package [0]. It uses the bundled copy or
murmur-hash. Since there doesn't really seem to be an independent
upstream distribution of murmur, I think it's fine to do the same.

What do others think?

I agree.  Just leave a comment explaining the situation so we can
revisit it later if the need arises.

I'm not convinced, I'm afraid. According to the SMHasher README [0]:<= br>
>This is the home for the Murmu= rHash family of hash functions along with the SMHas= her test suite used to verify them.

So that would count that as an independent upstream distribution of murmurhash, right?

Thanks,
ben

[0] https://github.com/aappleby/smhasher
--------------030704020007010807090105--