From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id QLA8LcCWmmZysAAAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 16:39:28 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e16b::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id QLA8LcCWmmZysAAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:39:28 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=nicolasgoaziou.fr header.s=mailo header.b=uAFLqLeR; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1721407168; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=T0TfWXoxLVG7q8mKkr3TrMPlcqQfFoYh/YNx8sWBq6w=; b=qoDAScPiQFqOpZ4MDhb3D7511RYodyavicAcEwYjfBe/mOBRcrfhXCmhrz0w/gNW++YvsF 9mmOzlG6TjTa+QvJj04IEKaaaPxhzURapvzduAuR4OcEHdXI8XbXMObJmnUTjrQ8D+3Lzg JxHop3FsZcN7NdnAnoTUwRmErKiJis4kUePu3yMDFKgXf+Pmh4hZoUo+ng0TlQ8IRhzATi Cac/8mCzAQn1RwyhEG+BL1pc1+a3TjjQw2sI/DhXfoLRzumQXPlh/MOgm3aUQR3g9EAoQd sMOUkUZv09q7qoUq6qTeDmO9tRaXYHO//g65YT75pF/AUZZ9juM3nzBfQmHzpg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=nicolasgoaziou.fr header.s=mailo header.b=uAFLqLeR; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1721407168; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=foah8msrxwDSL/x4ztaPFaagOL14tLUK+QCe9BFmSZ9zKtJWKNwPZCSQVg6i6uAKpB0E// wJaO7ou5xIBiUG41uyZDwdVOEQ/LZny7vtW+x3gpV72DJgQE9R9Rcuzikb6vg1e/tUitN0 FChCJ+0Be39sXOMUPG8cKW8jbw16LOKKeaMUGX4y4+/nK3KkJfKBqibIoNbMregATwMm5W xPJ9soG9BGyG+YpIBKVmEGtoSP9HUPGFFkjfApz4iUcJnQ3kF3J40x6SrwEkly6QQ6ii2Z j9GVKHSKJwQuM/nDZy+G5YNpN43YiN1aqHAKbaN806F3wt+cks0O/HX1d7SFRg== 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 684356DD62 for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:39:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sUqdA-0008IZ-3T; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:38:52 -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 1sUqd7-0008IQ-Rn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:38:50 -0400 Received: from msg-4.mailo.com ([213.182.54.15] helo=mailo.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sUqd5-0005u3-KZ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:38:49 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nicolasgoaziou.fr; s=mailo; t=1721407122; bh=ibGXiiTC42mRXc4ddlYTDVvpXvSjh4A1BOU1LheP4iA=; h=X-EA-Auth:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=uAFLqLeR/tIWNodca96DrcRoVSngSM+Y8TGSmP2/QzQMNffb/p6HBRBV9ZcmXcOeM H/ep/OIbYDA/YV4tZaA2uUosa4o3GrTaRvdoZaoqkbuY1QT4ntb5xNdRG5MItIuva1 420DXhPq8TexLxyxKg0JG0okZhI1azLSrV7VUU2s= Received: by b221-2.in.mailobj.net [192.168.90.22] with ESMTP via ip-20.mailobj.net [213.182.54.20] Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:38:42 +0200 (CEST) X-EA-Auth: 2+6fzy8GPzsC4/8WMt4SfXVbCGzJhQUl5N7G4rLmmcO22BVcJEgFwpcZtjTVv6wopKVb+HfZbi6TTXLkiFIrJHIi6j1X5YM4dx5Oqq4lsOE= To: Simon Tournier Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Question about changing versioning for TeX Live packages In-Reply-To: <87bk2veu0z.fsf@gmail.com> (Simon Tournier's message of "Wed, 17 Jul 2024 20:46:20 +0200") References: <87ed8yxhgk.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87bk2veu0z.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:38:39 +0200 Message-ID: <875xt1l4kw.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=213.182.54.15; envelope-from=mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr; helo=mailo.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-to: Nicolas Goaziou From: Nicolas Goaziou via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 684356DD62 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx13.migadu.com X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-TUID: wVSD6Cg/wXwe Hello, Simon Tournier writes: > Well, if I read correctly, there is: > > guix/build-system/texlive.scm: > > (define %texlive-tag "texlive-2023.0") > (define %texlive-revision 66594) > > gnu/packages/texlive.scm: > > (define %texlive-date "20230313") > (define %texlive-year (string-take %texlive-date 4)) > > > And the issue seems: > > (define-public texlive > (package > (name "texlive") > (version %texlive-date) This is the monolithic TeX Live, which is not modified, and is therefore off topic. > (define-public texlive-scripts > (package > (name "texlive-scripts") > (version (number->string %texlive-revision)) > > > Therefore, indeed it will be complicated to replace the =E2=80=99version= =E2=80=99 of > =E2=80=99texlive-scripts=E2=80=99 by something as =E2=80=992023=E2=80=99. > > But why not a =E2=80=99version=E2=80=99 as something as =E2=80=99texlive= =E2=80=99? Or just 2023XY? > Where XY is something to determine as the month or something else. Upstream uses version numbers such as "2024.2". I don't want to invent another system. > Are we speaking a change only for the package field =E2=80=99version=E2= =80=99? Or is > the discussion also about replacing the way to fetch from upstream? I'm only changing the `version' field. For the record, "core-updates" currently contains all TeX Live packages with their version switched to "2024.2". In the worst case, maybe a notice in the guix news will be sufficient. Regards, --=20 Nicolas Goaziou