From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id +MiACT+xL2FRAAEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 18:58:39 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id GCQFBT+xL2GKDwAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 16:58:39 +0000 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 D4DB715F20 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 18:58:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:36790 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLTZN-00043Y-Rz for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 12:58:37 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42446) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLTRo-0004tr-3f for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 12:50:49 -0400 Received: from h87-96-130-155.cust.a3fiber.se ([87.96.130.155]:56978 helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLTRm-0003jb-G5 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 12:50:47 -0400 From: Xinglu Chen DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=yoctocell.xyz; s=mail; t=1630515039; bh=AOTaDYukxMSeDelqrsW+b//4KJn//ayPtpYHTRG73fc=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=bVw5fTN1T+CKl8IIuoW3YsQj08C3QlA/Pel5D6SbE2NImd4aPU+EDFNBXWOP1nibK udwP91u4bJ0HPoaW4XuuNK8vJ435BZaVAGcebrbI6ZID54Hld+vCGLVte3k+w0l6vk rPVCSWXs4U6OyzuoUt6GxVplko5UvTVdueCauQWg= To: Leo Famulari , Sarah Morgensen , "Christopher Baines via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." Subject: Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages? In-Reply-To: <2def863d-fd2e-46c3-9a4c-9c6772724d27@www.fastmail.com> References: <8635qp1j6k.fsf@mgsn.dev> <87bl5clg3p.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> <2def863d-fd2e-46c3-9a4c-9c6772724d27@www.fastmail.com> Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 18:50:36 +0200 Message-ID: <87fsuojl43.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=87.96.130.155; envelope-from=public@yoctocell.xyz; helo=mail.yoctocell.xyz X-Spam_score_int: 14 X-Spam_score: 1.4 X-Spam_bar: + X-Spam_report: (1.4 / 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, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD=0.499, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD=1.999, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1630515518; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=aI9c7ahJ/xvrWNxgbETYsOs5O6wg6ClWvr/SFHOADwU=; b=awySzgRv+62e3EkmKr5XFc7U54bn5XgMBR3jcqlzHT8NRg2zfQgOJGFlQwowYUP68OaLs/ tNAZNpNklfBU7nLJKpqSNCKmbI2ll4vBhBh/U+wMtG8MjjH652uZjjwzqrwMHEqW2aVAKP n03/NDULQuOd+SR8icFCIBy5dBB2mIdeZjRLRhSCB4G17TWjA+b+Jbk3Hoc5QXl5PxLcxC MbMQ3uQVstvMuCYNh6042I/KdVGSIMAy8+nsGvJqaGbFrfCiVRVlt0mtL2i82MU6loyHQ/ 3Xb4pf5KFyN2fbojCag8tgS2bOsXgivbBzq2nJNeEaSaumKX9vX9ZECcpYQyzQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1630515518; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=UODZ1N25h9yWyG2miM4PUBqH+nTQ0IvvWFd2+heK4M79TVcjVHcgdeXxuxUZNWvBww5UWj OPZTahlIt+CgZFbYEj+9RM+UBQIIj4CdoRnGsfKVI78UWK10TYJ4C3lKABZfuF049QoCgv qREcVX4+AdkJ5ZhieMJs+hqajxccOnJU6sCkUftGYLA8JT3lVOHS+0dGEkEaOrbOhzJ6tM BxE8LIRW2qzeSOcJJxWSE3pd1vsOicTEL+WP2OGItrIhFFNpcBcfMutc+2y2B9Aodmosno Ci8ZR/N+nzCMzBMPNhPpoMVMPHDtbh5eR1kI7hc8K0NE3MWKfUZ9h7ikW0ZmFg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=yoctocell.xyz header.s=mail header.b=bVw5fTN1; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=yoctocell.xyz; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.22 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=yoctocell.xyz header.s=mail header.b=bVw5fTN1; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=yoctocell.xyz; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: D4DB715F20 X-Spam-Score: -4.22 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: FaysBH24YaPZ --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Sep 01 2021, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, at 06:55, Xinglu Chen wrote: >> I never felt like including the commit id in the version of a package >> was useful; e.g., just seeing the first seven characters of the commit >> id doesn=E2=80=99t really tell me anything about the version. I think i= t is >> more useful to put the date of the commit in the version; Nixpkgs does >> something like this[1]. I have started to put the date of the commit in >> a comment, just to make it easier for people to know how old it commit >> is; otherwise, one would have to find the VCS repo and find the commit >> just to see how old the commit is. > > The issue I see with only using the date is that Git dates are not > unique, in order, or even meaningful in a clear way. Well, seeing foo-1.0.0-1.2021-01-31 gives a user more useful information than something like foo-1.0.0-1.cabba9e With the former, I can quickly see that the version is from 2021-01-31, whereas with the latter, I would have to either find the VCS repo online or go to my local checkout of it and browse the logs. > Commit dates don't have a consistent meaning: are they the time of > first revision of a commit? Final revision of a commit? Time of > signing? Pushing? They are often useful to estimate a timeline, but > it's common for a Git "timeline" to jump back and forth by months or a > year due to long-running development branches being merged in, or due > to a "commit and then polish by rebasing" workflow. I would say the the time of the final commit would be the best option, but I agree that it can be ambiguous. > Using the revision ID (of sufficient length) gives an unambiguous > reference to the upstream source of a package and its artifacts in the > store. How would you describe a package version to upstream when > reporting a bug, except by revision ID? You can't tell them a > timestamp and expect them to know which code a buggy package is based > on. One can get the commit id of a package by simply running =E2=80=98guix edit PACKAGE=E2=80=99 and copying the commit id from the package definition. I = don=E2=80=99t think hiding the commit id from the package version would be a problem for this situation. > We could certainly add a timestamp to our version strings for > VCS-based packages, but we should keep the revision ID too. I haven=E2=80=99t really found the commit id that useful when looking at the version of a package; adding a timestamp would certainly be better than the status quo. :-) --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJJBAEBCAAzFiEEAVhh4yyK5+SEykIzrPUJmaL7XHkFAmEvr1wVHHB1YmxpY0B5 b2N0b2NlbGwueHl6AAoJEKz1CZmi+1x5/2QP/i81SBPTMLjIsY91ztSCxqFrsB9W V6odNNyYsQk2y8tqyobN+Yyzw1Ydau/ek7LVuYwcPnp4MDcjt7J+53GItMNnqppj hpn+Ze0Dy1ZhX8DzIF2W8aVFx0peiM+NE8SIema1JMWb0cCKZMveYpigmTOKbQRh n3OWuKoGeuMIESzWB0yPXskgIa7LXU4FY1rRx+sh6Z1S5oaatfNS+ti0I9Djg7x9 4Q8r4bV/0OIpWuYnfHmAd3pVxv3jEFh4+3SqP0a0dLrOK0Ec+v9y76MjyooAkaks Mv9ppp881cpK73s6IZeNGjLTWkRPElbL/GNzLKm4vKaK05FQbt9EBuk/L6utHJLR hHWH5Fwl05ZpwS9knzwDiUqgxqyIvcyPOD0fA73mP1QdcQ8VrRzqfxysvoem+pkb +W+jV3qZBZdT1U396q0CD2UVd6cfiOcearfBVgE+ZnPIw12p1All9zUUNXbpLMK7 FF1nZ1RQYaWsWFb6VHk598UN+A76+cOqeNYLY42W4yUO+8qEOOTO8ipxwt77LevC 0BFEydA3SdUi7iOtbIluXQHUvWM+Fbpc4+TgmJje7o3vuz2fFa3IzmEAuDtri29/ WCGhuJyLR6ttpiGEA97RfKcnSHSUy0QtgnlIumJf8eAhuppE72MtCOPoxkbGQpFt F0ORjGScyExq3j3R =2Bnp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--