[emacs]: snapshots against latest versions

[emacs]: snapshots against latest versions

[Cayetano Santos]

Hi Guix,

  Following a recent patch to an snapshot of an emacs package
  (emacs-mastodon), where latest stable (tagged) release dates back from
  a long time, the question of whether to send patches for non stable
  (tagged) versions is pertinent or not.

  Of course, the answer is clear: we only package stable. Guix manual
  (22.4.3 Version Numbers) clearly states that "We usually package only
  the latest version of a given free software project ... Occasionally,
  we package snapshots of upstream’s version control system (VCS)
  instead of formal releases.  This should remain exceptional.". Fine
  with that.

  Now, regarding emacs-xyz packages, the situation is a bit ambiguous.
  We have (old?) (tagged) releases, as well as snapshots. What is the
  rule to follow when we contribute ? At what point in time do we
  consider we may submit patches for snapshots ? With which frequency ?
  Do we consider number or relevance of commits since latest version ?
  Do we base our decision on time elapsed ? Simply put, as for now, we
  have a mix of melpa-stable and melpa: when one may decide to forget
  stable and move forward to latest ? Of course, this is author’s role,
  but I’m wondering how subjective all of this is, and how this might
  impact quality of provided packages.

Best,

Cayetano

Re: [emacs]: snapshots against latest versions

[Munyoki Kilyungi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1422 bytes --]

Hi Cayetano!  Allow me to chime in, although I'm
green.

Cayetano Santos <csantosb@inventati.org>
aliandika:

> Hi Guix,
>
>   Following a recent patch to an snapshot of an emacs package
>   (emacs-mastodon), where latest stable (tagged) release dates back from
>   a long time, the question of whether to send patches for non stable
>   (tagged) versions is pertinent or not.
>
>   Of course, the answer is clear: we only package stable. Guix manual
>   (22.4.3 Version Numbers) clearly states that "We usually package only
>   the latest version of a given free software project ... Occasionally,
>   we package snapshots of upstream’s version control system (VCS)
>   instead of formal releases.  This should remain exceptional.". Fine
>   with that.
>
From my experience, this depends.  In the python
system, updating some things can have ripple
effects that propagate to other packages, and
sometimes in a not so nice way.  For packages that
have ripple effects, I find useful to package to
the latest version upto where things are stable.
Also, sometimes, a recent change can introduce a
security bug, so in such a case, unless a patch is
provided, I see no need to be in the latest
version.

[...]

-- 
(Life is like a pencil that will surely run out,
    but will leave the beautiful writing of life.)
(D4F09EB110177E03C28E2FE1F5BBAE1E0392253F
    (hkp://keys.openpgp.org))

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 865 bytes --]