unofficial mirror of guix-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer@gmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com>,
	Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>,
	guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: On raw strings in <origin> commit field
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 08:57:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <97f31fd3-38bd-1744-bb03-6ae514ae78a9@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fea5818257247fce727d4c5178b830b1a06eb8b7.camel@gmail.com>

On 31.12.2021 04:15, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
>                                                   [...] Obviously, when
> travelling back in time, we want Guix' "1.2.3" to be whatever it was by
> that point, but on the other hand, we also want a recently pulled Guix
> to have a reasonably recent "v1.2.3" if it claims to have "1.2.3". [...]

I think here lies the crux of the disagreement.  As far as I understand,
Guix doesn't intend to support the notion that one version string could
represent two different actual versions of a program throughout time.

Rather, I think, the reason Guix keeps both the tag and commit ref is
simply that the tag could disappear from the repo.  (In my experience,
that's easy to do by accident when you clone a repo and push it to a
new location.  You have to fetch and push the tags explicitly.)

If a tag ever *was* changed to point to a different commit, meaning that
the same version string now represents a different actual version, then
I think Guix would give that version a new name, such as "1.2.3-new" or
whatever.  I don't know if this ever actually happened, but I think this
is how Guix would probably want to deal with it if it does.  Having one
string represent two different actual versions is just really terrible
and I don't see Guix ever supporting such a practice.


[tangent follows]

(A software developer might argue that two different commits actually
are the same version of the software, say for instance because only a
minor change in the build system or README file or such was made, i.e.
files that are considered "not part of the end-product," but in Guix
land I think we wouldn't let that fare.  Maybe an exception would be
made if it was proven that the actual package produced by Guix from
both commits will always be bit-identical.  Even then, better not.)


P.S. I hope I'm actually helping to add clarity to the thread instead
of more confusion by adding my voice.  I was just skimming the ML,
found this thread interesting, and thought I might be able to add
clarity, because it seemed a little confusing. :-)

-- 
Taylan


  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-31  7:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-28 20:55 On raw strings in <origin> commit field Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-29  8:39 ` zimoun
2021-12-29 20:25   ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-30 12:43     ` zimoun
2021-12-31  0:02       ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31  1:23         ` zimoun
2021-12-31  3:27           ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31  9:31             ` Ricardo Wurmus
2021-12-31 11:07               ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31 12:31                 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2021-12-31 13:18                   ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31 13:15               ` zimoun
2021-12-31 15:19                 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31 17:21                   ` zimoun
2021-12-31 20:52                     ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31 23:36         ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-01  1:33           ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-01  5:00             ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-01 10:33               ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-01 20:37                 ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-01 22:55                   ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-02 22:57                     ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-03 21:25                       ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-03 23:14                         ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-04 19:55                           ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-04 23:42                             ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-05  9:28                               ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-05 20:43                                 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-06 10:38                                   ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-06 11:25                                     ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-02 19:30                   ` zimoun
2022-01-02 21:35                     ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-03  9:22                       ` zimoun
2022-01-03 18:13                         ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-03 19:07                           ` zimoun
2022-01-03 20:19                             ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-03 23:00                               ` zimoun
2022-01-04  5:23                                 ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-04  8:51                                   ` zimoun
2022-01-04 13:15                                     ` zimoun
2022-01-04 19:45                                       ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-04 19:53                                         ` zimoun
2021-12-31 23:56         ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-01  0:15           ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-30  1:13 ` Mark H Weaver
2021-12-30 12:56   ` zimoun
2021-12-31  3:15   ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2021-12-31  7:57     ` Taylan Kammer [this message]
2021-12-31 10:55       ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-01  1:41     ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-01 11:12       ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-01 17:45         ` Timothy Sample
2022-01-01 19:52           ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-02 23:00             ` Timothy Sample
2022-01-03 15:46           ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-01-01 20:19         ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-01 23:20           ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-02 12:25             ` Mark H Weaver
2022-01-02 14:09               ` Liliana Marie Prikler
2022-01-02  2:07         ` Bengt Richter
2021-12-31 17:56 ` Vagrant Cascadian
2022-01-03 15:51   ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-01-03 16:29     ` Vagrant Cascadian

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://guix.gnu.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=97f31fd3-38bd-1744-bb03-6ae514ae78a9@gmail.com \
    --to=taylan.kammer@gmail.com \
    --cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=liliana.prikler@gmail.com \
    --cc=mhw@netris.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).