From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Expat and libxslt changes for core-updates Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 22:26:53 +0200 Message-ID: <87lh2ajgqa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160608101016.GA20565@debian-netbook> <20160609164317.GA5540@jasmine> <20160609231935.GA14894@jasmine> <87bn3919oa.fsf@gnu.org> <20160611004927.GA1242@jasmine> 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]:36832) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bCByI-0002Pa-9C for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:27:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bCByE-0007Ly-1i for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:27:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160611004927.GA1242@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Fri, 10 Jun 2016 20:49:27 -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: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari skribis: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 02:59:49PM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Leo Famulari skribis: >> > The merge will probably be messy... >>=20 >> We should leave it to you, to minimize breakage. > > Okay, should I do it today or is core-updates frozen? It=E2=80=99s OK if you do it today. :-) The branch is being built but it=E2=80=99s just the beginning. >> > Off-topic: A regular package and a grafted package on master, and an >> > updated version of the package on core-updates... this is getting very >> > complicated and we should try our best to avoid such tangled situations >> > in the future. >>=20 >> Do you think it would help to delay such upgrades in =E2=80=98core-updat= es=E2=80=99 >> until the time where =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99 is getting ready for= merge? > > I don't know if there is a great solution; I think this is a really > perverse case. > > I think of core-updates as the place to put these sorts of changes. If > we were to decide to delay the changes, we'd all have our own private > core-updates forks, and then we'd probably duplicate work and forget > about things. What do you think? Sorry, I explained myself poorly. Here, we (1) grafted Expat in master, (2) upgraded Expat in core-updates, and (3) only after that did we merge master in core-updates, making the merge more troublesome, right? My question was whether we should swap (2) and (3). Thoughts? Ludo=E2=80=99.