unofficial mirror of guix-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludovic.courtes@inria.fr>
To: Ryan Prior <rprior@protonmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tricking peer review
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 09:40:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7dedbms.fsf@inria.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VAvsM8o3G8NsMwxf60R5TjHWhT0BYCZfqmybzP80u0acH_kGnqF2v7CK4y-DQAe28R5zSYhs1MqblSj67SuXNhVo64KJCngG-1_gwGyUMpc=@protonmail.com> (Ryan Prior's message of "Fri, 15 Oct 2021 22:28:26 +0000")

Hi Ryan,

Ryan Prior <rprior@protonmail.com> skribis:

> I've suggested this before and this seems like a good time to bring it
> up again: can we create a database of known "bad" Guix commit hashes,
> and make time-machine fetch the list and warn before it'll visit one
> of those hashes? This would resolve the land-mine problem and
> generally de-risk our git tree, which is maintained by fallible
> volunteers who will occasionally push tragic commits.

How would we define “bad” though?

By definition, packages found in past Guix revisions are missing
features, have unfixed bugs and unpatched security vulnerabilities.
Yet, pinning the Guix revision or re-deploying a past revision as-is has
its uses and I’d say it’s a key feature, even.

I don’t think there are “tragic” commits either.  Usually, one records a
revision that works for them and use the same months later.

Thanks,
Ludo’.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-10-18  7:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-15 18:54 Tricking peer review Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-15 22:03 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-10-15 22:28   ` Ryan Prior
2021-10-15 22:45     ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-10-15 22:59       ` Ryan Prior
2021-10-18  7:40     ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2021-10-18 19:56       ` Ryan Prior
2021-10-19  8:39       ` zimoun
2021-10-20 23:03         ` Leo Famulari
2021-10-21  8:14           ` zimoun
2021-10-15 23:13   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2021-10-18  7:47     ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-18  7:34   ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-19  8:36 ` zimoun
2021-10-19 12:56   ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-19 14:22     ` zimoun
2021-10-19 15:41       ` Incentives for review Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-19 16:56         ` zimoun
2021-10-19 19:14         ` Ricardo Wurmus
2021-10-19 19:34           ` Christine Lemmer-Webber
2021-10-19 19:50           ` Joshua Branson
2021-10-21 20:03           ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-20 21:37         ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2021-10-21 13:38           ` Artem Chernyak
2021-10-22 20:03             ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2021-10-23  1:43               ` Kyle Meyer
2021-10-23  3:42                 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2021-10-23  7:37                 ` zimoun
2021-10-23 16:18                   ` public-inbox/elfeed -> Maildir bridge (was: Incentives for review) Kyle Meyer
2021-10-24 12:18                   ` Jonathan McHugh
2021-10-21 16:06           ` Incentives for review Ricardo Wurmus
2021-10-21 16:32             ` zimoun
2021-10-22 20:06             ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2021-10-21 15:07         ` Katherine Cox-Buday
2021-10-21 16:10           ` Ricardo Wurmus
2021-10-21 17:52             ` Katherine Cox-Buday
2021-10-21 18:21             ` Arun Isaac
2021-10-21 19:58               ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-21 21:42               ` Ricardo Wurmus
2021-10-22 10:48                 ` Arun Isaac
2021-10-22 11:21                   ` zimoun
2021-10-23  6:09                     ` Arun Isaac
2021-10-22 10:56                 ` Jonathan McHugh
2021-10-22  7:40               ` zimoun
2021-10-22 11:09                 ` Arun Isaac
2021-10-22  8:37               ` Jonathan McHugh
2021-10-22  9:15                 ` zimoun
2021-10-22 10:40                 ` Jonathan McHugh
2021-10-22 11:32                   ` zimoun
2021-10-21 21:18             ` Jonathan McHugh
2021-10-22 10:44               ` Arun Isaac
2021-10-22 11:06               ` Jonathan McHugh
2021-10-21 21:22           ` zimoun
2021-10-28 14:57             ` Katherine Cox-Buday
2021-10-21 17:51         ` Vagrant Cascadian
2021-10-24 11:47           ` Efraim Flashner
2021-10-20  8:22   ` Tricking peer review Giovanni Biscuolo
2021-10-20  9:10     ` zimoun
2021-10-20  8:29   ` patches for new packages proper workflow (Re: Tricking peer review) Giovanni Biscuolo
2021-10-20 23:09 ` Tricking peer review Leo Famulari
2021-10-21  7:12   ` Ludovic Courtès
2021-10-25 13:09 ` Christine Lemmer-Webber
2021-10-28  8:38   ` Ludovic Courtès

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=87h7dedbms.fsf@inria.fr \
    --to=ludovic.courtes@inria.fr \
    --cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=liliana.prikler@gmail.com \
    --cc=rprior@protonmail.com \
    /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).