Lars-Dominik Braun <lars@6xq.net> writes:

> Hi Christopher,
>
>> Anyway, I wouldn't like for this change to lower the standard though,
>> it's currently the only package in Guix with an invalid description (as
>> far as I'm aware), is there some reason why it doesn't have one?
> it simply fell through the cracks[1]. Commit
> 0a379de3249d5e9ff66fb404f7e5aa8ce2cb3d24 adds a proper descripton.
>
> Sorry for the trouble,

No problem, thanks for fixing it.

> [1] Unfortunately I cannot run `guix lint` on an entire git changeset,
> so instead I have to check each package by hand and I probably missed
> rocminfo. I wish someday we can have a branch/pull-request-based
> workflow with automated CI checks (linting, `guix pull`, signature
> verification, …) *before* merging to master.

This is something I've put some time in to, but it needs some general
support before I'm confident that the things I have in mind can become
reality. I recently started a thread on guix-devel [1] about what I have
in mind, so please comment if you're interested in this area.

1: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2021-08/msg00001.html