From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms1.migadu.com with LMTPS id qJYGAYowJGalLgAA62LTzQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 23:15:54 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1.migadu.com with LMTPS id qJYGAYowJGalLgAA62LTzQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 23:15:54 +0200 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=eu8u5Z08; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1713647753; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=OCz4GHhnhaDD0rES9aLAl/kszxSagKBWfUQ3wxg3Txw=; b=X7fSG10Eq5CH+Y4Gab0z4DBBu5dsDJ2ydjUE5ejQfw2I5pJHgf7I2esWkGBPZ6HX30mqfY gBmnEbQEhlaFIRzM6ZpSqZ4ALaYW7QrvsmUZwlzWjxmhKz/Dnp7m2oRi7YjuCeu+RqOd68 dJxyAZqYxqzff3foTX3wq/FuM3fg32Nd/Rt5aoPebONAFzqHzChsQnapzjvy/0D5S415iw xdZwz1XeJHFyqX+IhLIcCwfv1eCbaIdbPFFSXjCU4skZb8OrdnX58QQjwZGUmSvre8dwxw XMyIwI9vaVxVZN5vQ54Unhe+fcYaCNf84gKEf3++zIy6svHZZL+Xw/xxmDWRVQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1713647753; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=c2pMxd+6TUMLoauxxAXDYcNSrmBGBpIIfGPdhZ/CbFIFbdAqkASI678ewbFJxsOvlVyfeW kiRQDzoTO3X6V0rZvr5cbAf3e2H7UcspGC9yYKNANvIPR8fbLI3NYlDRORHiY/RAhqdj4y 7i4eH7ZmEntpl3xfFeJuSUoBO9CO6ZpclkDAHSBQS11xCRjtC30lwuFb1pw61SIsNkkWaa vdHdrFezwDjmwViW5MooBZ09s2kI20iCWtSAoOYCpTA1NVj1VHSe7F1TE8XRNRAkMUTpkR wKizf38R85jPxCp3UxT5PWUBBr5PukINk/vGwll4kTX4IGfKJJ02GpRFVRc76w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=eu8u5Z08; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com 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 A4D413323B for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 23:15:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ryI3N-00078s-Et; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 17:15:21 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ryI3K-00078d-Ou for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 17:15:19 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x82f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::82f]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ryI3I-0005l8-QF; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 17:15:18 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-x82f.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4365c1451d4so18929221cf.2; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 14:15:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1713647709; x=1714252509; darn=gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=OCz4GHhnhaDD0rES9aLAl/kszxSagKBWfUQ3wxg3Txw=; b=eu8u5Z08JIWiisMG20TKzGzQO9+iMNjPgz0/q/T0FicjuB9VXwvxem0YboaRoPkPMq CYBE/kFHIat0lqEQhXPTTAneMtTMryCLVaX0VElGnlSfJ0YxFkxHSsXfVl6/zjq8KJhs 6oBLNKk5uZlbnW1nDDqMyOgkDVnCPA+gjXB92p++vBgsWjY2J9RoZOHS4Q9PM7r0FQhM s/ek+nBEOtmcgHydJlU8dT4AIrEXwNTvtA5rW7GF7n8zoDB6syKddiUSTwyS+8fUCcos 7zv0xaMB0ElWzqxM5t3iWk4eL0yNFYFd5ZYiIvoZblpv9KFZFzo4h9yXA4RT1cVNIdDI 9J4Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1713647709; x=1714252509; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OCz4GHhnhaDD0rES9aLAl/kszxSagKBWfUQ3wxg3Txw=; b=NeIMBsLMlQliD3D4RZt5TkFySjvGcXAf2TyauSBAY3Nv4NBdcrqg7iBqxeDMBLpLf3 kYibtNAhBRVLlPWe6r5z3ras6G7bRg6Kn4OvFv/CXEjoO3Pi+LOL33UUhY/5yk087xTq DWTjt1ZkEKtArBmVKoZzWmxY1NmSkVIXzW4e/Ih95T1L2rSrRdzZAlbi2nA97V6p6B/C pnfTNBx2kzsJv5eYs+qoaRI0URtxkNRS+4OqR6p+MANBlP7ehpYP7+bW1fSif6AF/7y6 QN2Sa7vgtv6ZQnWoc/vEzxkW/GnAtSvTM3hWBBTmC7tuQWFPjLBKGB6z2bZ66zVorrNi UswA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVgDOV1o+Tr8444lgaIHl2/6q8BHQg7z2sIgkiIP20SX1kjEjzCdGsGhXz5/rrosscXQM8v4yfACnot7+7+7bjLEmk= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxWHGIqZRAvWLuIpLPV4IFIoEEYVf3966BeWVSLuKEJLoWUUbr0 b69d4JRIVvSoG/2we/1yIE1NRTvkLf/Y00GOQ9kqIaD1Jdk1tXQQ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF4T4LX1NMUsUMAnEBbylZI++lJreD0hmvr1pAMj5/4rlr1VVqgRztEna2Tp248Hz+cWed5XQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:651:b0:437:b6a1:de30 with SMTP id a17-20020a05622a065100b00437b6a1de30mr6077539qtb.12.1713647709358; Sat, 20 Apr 2024 14:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hurd (dsl-10-134-76.b2b2c.ca. [72.10.134.76]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g19-20020ac84813000000b004364d940d3dsm2799648qtq.96.2024.04.20.14.15.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 20 Apr 2024 14:15:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Cournoyer To: Christopher Baines Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Josselin Poiret , Guix Devel , 70456@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: Status of =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99?= In-Reply-To: <87mspo2sme.fsf@cbaines.net> (Christopher Baines's message of "Sat, 20 Apr 2024 12:14:33 +0100") References: <87edbzri2p.fsf@gnu.org> <87mspo2sme.fsf@cbaines.net> Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 17:15:07 -0400 Message-ID: <87mspnivms.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::82f; envelope-from=maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com; helo=mail-qt1-x82f.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -9.69 X-Spam-Score: -9.69 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: A4D413323B X-Migadu-Scanner: mx12.migadu.com X-TUID: TTk7c0Bdp+wz Hi Christopher, Christopher Baines writes: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > >> What=E2=80=99s the status of =E2=80=98core-updates=E2=80=99? What are t= he areas where help is >> needed? >> >> I know a lot has happened since the last update=C2=B9, which is roughly = when >> I dropped the ball due to other commitments, but I=E2=80=99m not sure wh= ere we >> are now. > > I haven't really been following core-updates, but I have had a look > since there's a request to merge it now [1]. > > I'm really concerned by the commits on the branch though, assuming I'm > using Git right, there are 6351 commits on the branch: > > git log --pretty=3Doneline core-updates ^master | wc -l > > Somehow, I think there's been a couple of pushes of commits to > core-updates that have partially duplicated lots of commits from master, > I put some more details in: > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/70456#3 > > I think keeping the Git commit history clean and representative is > really important, so to me at least this means core-updates can't be > merged to master in it's current form, even if the changes overall from > these 6351 commits are reasonable. > > I'm really not sure how to move forward though, I had a go at trying to > rebuild the branch without introducing the thousands of duplicate > commits and that produced a branch with 765 commits over master, which > still seems a lot, but a big improvement over 6351: > > https://git.cbaines.net/guix/log/?h=3Dchris-core-updates-no-duplicates-= attempt > > That was really hard going though, as there's plenty of merge conflicts > along the way, and I'm pretty sure I solved some of them > incorrectly. The resulting branch also differs from core-updates. I also think Git commit history is important, but in this case I weigh the value of removing ~5000 duplicated rust commits against the risks of resolving merge conflicts wrong or forgetting commits upon attempting to recreate the branch from scratch lower than the benefit. > Maybe someone with more time, care and attention could do a better job, > but it might be more worthwhile just starting fresh and rather than > trying to produce a like for like branch just without the thousands of > duplicate commits, effectively manually rebase the branch (without the > duplicate commits) on master and try to get the commits in to a usable > state. Given the little attention core-updates is currently receiving, I doubt someone is willing to put the effort to recreate the branch from scratch to clean its git history; at least speaking for myself I'd rather spend the little hack time I have to work on it toward getting it finalized. I believe how these duplicates came to exist was probably two separate master -> core-updates merge commits, with one of them ending up being rebased on top of the other, probably so that it could be pushed. Perhaps we could capture in our contribution guidelines that rebasing a merge commit should never be done to keep the history clean, and that in a situation where: 1. a merge has been prepared locally (with conflicts resolved and all) 2. a new commit has appeared on the remote branch the solution should be to merge the remote branch into the local one instead of rebasing the local one on the remote one (as is usually done). Disclaimer: I haven't actually tried this suggested approach, which should be done before documenting it, if there's a consensus to do so. In other words, I suggest we document what *not* to do to avoid repeating the same mistake in the future, and move on. --=20 Thanks, Maxim