From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add femtolisp.
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 13:05:17 +0200
Message-ID: <877faeeo7m.fsf@elephly.net>
References: <20160913190416.1462-1-ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<87mvjbegxs.fsf@elephly.net> <87oa3rmtg8.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<87d1k6etze.fsf@elephly.net> <874m5i3k0h.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
	<87y42u24nc.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87a8faer2a.fsf@elephly.net>
	<871t0miy7t.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47204)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1bk80Q-0007mz-AK
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 07:05:31 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1bk80M-0006Ps-LN
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 07:05:30 -0400
Received: from sender163-mail.zoho.com ([74.201.84.163]:21388)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1bk80M-0006PT-DZ
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 07:05:26 -0400
In-reply-to: <871t0miy7t.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org


ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> writes:

> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:
>> In this case we should probably split these changes up as they are not
>> related to one another.  Alternatively, the summary line should be
>> changed to apply to all of the changes in this patch.
>
> Can you give me an example how the summary line should look like then?

I just checked the git log but couldn’t find a similar package in which
changes of this magnitude were summarised in one commit.

I suggest splitting this up.  Actually, though, I think the description
doesn’t need changing.  I only suggested removing the sentence because I
assumed that the package didn’t yet exist.  There’s no harm in keeping
it.

Without the description change it’s really just one thing that has been
changed:

    gnu: femtolisp: Remove custom "patch-makefile" phase.

    * gnu/packages/lisp.scm (femtolisp)[arguments]: Remove
      "patch-makefile" phase; specify test target; build "release"
      target instead of "default".

What do you think?

~~ Ricardo