Re: [PATCH 1/7] gnu: gobject-introspection: Update to 1.44.0.

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> skribis:

> Now, I would still like some guidelines for what to commit to master and what
> to core-updates, that we could possibly write down in HACKING (and update when
> the hydra situation changes). Does something like "If you modify PACKAGE from
> base.scm, or 'guix refresh -l PACKAGE' shows that >= N packages are affected,
> then commit to core-updates" make sense? If yes, what should be the value
> of N? If not, what would be a better idea?

I personally use ‘guix refresh -l’ as the metric to decide whether to
create a branch or not.  I think it’s a good one though the ideal one
would be makespan.  Another consideration is the current build farm
load.

The “Commit Access” section mentions “upgrades that trigger a lot of
rebuilds”, which is quite vague but appeals to “common sense.”  I’m not
sure this can usefully worded as strictly as you suggest.  WDYT?

Thanks,
Ludo’.