From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: Building core-updates?
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 09:43:29 +0200
Message-ID: <87lhbdzty6.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87612i1fks.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3l67yee.fsf@netris.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44313)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Zk5uV-0004aq-E0
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 03:47:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1Zk5tC-0005CA-Ar
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 03:46:43 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87r3l67yee.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Thu, 08
	Oct 2015 00:54:49 -0400")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> skribis:

> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes:
>
>> =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99 provides the long awaited fix for locales=
, and it=E2=80=99s
>> essentially ready to merge.
>>
>> We need to choose whether to revert 42e735d based on the discussion in
>> <http://bugs.gnu.org/21620>.  Mark?  Andreas?
>
> I think we should leave 42e735d for now, until we understand what's
> going on.  We can revert it in the next core-updates cycle if it turns
> out to be unneeded.

Yeah, makes sense.

>> Either way, we should start building all of the branch.
>
> Agreed.

I=E2=80=99ve enabled it now.

Thanks for your feedback,
Ludo=E2=80=99.