From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: gnumaint changes Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 14:01:36 +0200 Message-ID: <87lgafibtr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20180627082345.5a23mezrrltcdbnl@abyayala> <8736x7pu2k.fsf@gnu.org> <87h8lnoeti.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgahj206.fsf@gnu.org> <87fu0p5fpb.fsf@gnu.org> <87wou0tpki.fsf@gnu.org> <877em04dp4.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53738) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdwll-0001L6-41 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 08:01:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fdwlj-0000Mz-Pl for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 08:01:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <877em04dp4.fsf@gnu.org> (Mike Gerwitz's message of "Thu, 12 Jul 2018 12:32:39 -0400") 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+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Mike Gerwitz Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, maintainers@gnu.org Mike Gerwitz skribis: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 17:57:01 +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Mike Gerwitz skribis: > > [...] > >>> Do you have a couple examples of what you think would be beneficial to >>> pull form Guix? I'm certainly open to the idea where it makes sense; >>> there's no sense in us duplicating effort within GNU unnecessarily. >> >> I realize that Guix doesn=E2=80=99t have all GNU packages yet so in fact= there=E2=80=99s >> not so much to pull from at this point. I was suspecting blurbs are >> likely to be more up-to-date in Guix, but that=E2=80=99s very subjective= , I >> don=E2=80=99t know if this is the case. > > It seems like the blurbs in Guix may be slightly different: in Womb they > are provided by the package author for use here: > > https://www.gnu.org/manual/blurbs.html > > In Guix they may be augmented with additional information that the > Guix package author finds useful, and may deviate from what the GNU > package author provided. Is that true? In theory, yes, but =E2=80=98guix lint=E2=80=99 warns when this happens. (IME package authors provide the initial blurb, but very few GNU people actually know about the Womb and the fact there=E2=80=99s a blurb for their package their. Back when I looked more closely at this, it was often Brandon or John who=E2=80=99d take care of providing blurbs.) > It makes sense to me, though, that Guix and that page would be in > sync. But if the intent is to have the blurbs be written by the package > authors, syncing them would mean that Guix would forefit the ability to > manage its own package descriptions. I'm not sure if that's something > Guix would want to do. Yes, we=E2=80=99ve been doing that from the start, but occasionally, people would like to amend blurbs, and I point them to the Womb, but it=E2=80=99s = a bit cumbersome; no big deal, but not as fluid as could be. > I'm also unaware of how many GNU package maintainers even remember that > the blurbs page even exists. So it's possible that such descriptions > could be updated. It'd be worth maintainers@ occasionally asking > package maintainers to review our records. Yeah. >>> I'm also working on automating parts of our recordkeeping: in the next >>> few weeks, Womb will have up-to-date version information automatically >>> pulled from info-gnu release announcements; the FTP server; and a couple >>> websites where necessary, though I'll be manually committing it for the >>> first few months to verify that it is all working properly. So Guix >>> might also be able to depend on rec/gnupackages.rec for checking for new >>> releases as well, since unfortunately GNU doesn't mandate the use of the >>> FTP server, or even info-gnu (so releases are all over the place). >> >> The (guix gnu-maintenance) modules are tools to retrieve the latest >> version of a GNU package by traversing its ftp.gnu.org (or similar) >> directory. That=E2=80=99s something you might find useful. Here=E2=80= =99s an example: > > Thanks---I was going to reference Guix's implementation. > > But do note that many GNU packages don't make use of GNU's FTP server, > so this doesn't work on its own as a comprehensive version check > tool for GNU software. But if this hasn't been a practical problem for > Guix yet, then there's no need to change that. Like I said it uses a different method and URL for packages not on gnu.org. Thanks for your feedback, Ludo=E2=80=99.