From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
To: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>, guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Question about changing versioning for TeX Live packages
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 20:46:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bk2veu0z.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ed8yxhgk.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Hi Nicolas,
Sorry if this had been answered elsewhere, I have missed it.
On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 at 19:07, Nicolas Goaziou via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." <guix-devel@gnu.org> wrote:
> I'd like to change versioning for TeX Live packages. Currently, it
> refers to a revision number in the upstream SVN repository, such as
> 70951.
>
> I'd rather use tags from TeX Live releases, e.g., "2023.0", for at least
> two reasons:
>
> 1. We don't need a granularity to the revision level for TeX Live
> packages;
> 2. Revision numbers are not very user-friendly, while tags are.
>
> In a nutshell, my plan is to change version for all packages from
> (revision) 66594 to the equivalent tag "2023.0". Unfortunately, as
> mathematics go, 2023 is lesser than 66594. As a consequence, this may
> introduce trouble when upgrading those packages. Therefore, my question
> is the following: how could I proceed to make this version change as
> smooth as possible for end-users?
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)
and
(define-public texlive-scripts
(package
(name "texlive-scripts")
(version (number->string %texlive-revision))
Therefore, indeed it will be complicated to replace the ’version’ of
’texlive-scripts’ by something as ’2023’.
But why not a ’version’ as something as ’texlive’? Or just 2023XY?
Where XY is something to determine as the month or something else.
Are we speaking a change only for the package field ’version’? Or is
the discussion also about replacing the way to fetch from upstream?
Cheers,
simon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-17 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-15 17:07 Question about changing versioning for TeX Live packages Nicolas Goaziou via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2024-07-17 18:46 ` Simon Tournier [this message]
2024-07-19 16:38 ` Nicolas Goaziou via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2024-07-22 14:13 ` Simon Tournier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bk2veu0z.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).