From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id AOgTJyUKMWHghQAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 19:30:13 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id mFzPIiUKMWFZFAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 17:30:13 +0000 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 D80B0EB29 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 19:30:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:36258 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLqXT-0002f5-W6 for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 13:30:12 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60462) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLqXD-0002eZ-Ab for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 13:29:55 -0400 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]:48309) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLqXA-0000Ru-Jn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 13:29:55 -0400 Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 965C75C01EC; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 13:29:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 02 Sep 2021 13:29:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=Yib8ahyWVx58oBQyg/kH57AT h9sodQfPHr8D7j5qsbE=; b=OatKOPhHTfQ9duNijE99L+z+wudxMTPWyK+sQatJ OagVUWM6nGAOX3i7tQkTOqf+4EBfIHy+B0bIY9fi6jlqB1A64N4wPbSrZ1K8AjDD RYKuuHDAKv5wQWnTApJ43K4zvlu71dGfkAQkhyiLCD6awO9RE7E9372CaH6fI8Ew I8o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=Yib8ah yWVx58oBQyg/kH57ATh9sodQfPHr8D7j5qsbE=; b=Ipp2kzeVvY+fMrflD7Si9n 4HsSaWM9IESHH6n8JEivosxdYP5GI3YYyYCmta7C/G7OwxXdSeKYriqIYsIDAV6i UPUtN0Uq7dd9uanG3V3VGAYodvvwCY2F9Kb79P06u3e+lrFM5pUpoLfTLVOJNQV/ UQn0TqWFs7wufYAMrfNBmUPwZZ/+alQqKFxyW+nEvaokvFx+FSI5FvOK+zByobI1 o42nWYLNGreQMEMIldDvSxBaINCmeG/ue2G3WLKUdV34LSpIjpCGS98wKTFx4pru 2RPr67agIaguB5ZCSZh5x2z/t2Kpi46Js6eY//E40PYp7HnVsuPR07Mn9PkI2+ng == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddruddvhedguddufecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepnfgvohcu hfgrmhhulhgrrhhiuceolhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvgeqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepueekkedtffdvtddugeejgedtvefhueefiedvjeeitdeigedtveejvdejheff vefgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplh gvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvg X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 13:29:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 13:29:49 -0400 From: Leo Famulari To: Xinglu Chen Subject: Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages? Message-ID: References: <8635qp1j6k.fsf@mgsn.dev> <87bl5clg3p.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> <2def863d-fd2e-46c3-9a4c-9c6772724d27@www.fastmail.com> <87fsuojl43.fsf@yoctocell.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.111.4.29; envelope-from=leo@famulari.name; helo=out5-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Christopher Baines via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." , Sarah Morgensen Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1630603813; 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:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=Yib8ahyWVx58oBQyg/kH57ATh9sodQfPHr8D7j5qsbE=; b=VW5J6lGlo+OvySGkX7yej0tM1HdTwDGGvtMwp+SXl8didY3425D2ZXdJ/RL1Y5UleGzclI hKA2ZsTJwgPkZSnQroVlgO6uzMwJIJWzV2DAN40f2QyfbdMGOETGy+EoqhWCLjxIY0m4q6 eJYH2rDS6yy7mjHk2UWQWgR7qiDQcwyxu5Yo+n7FtRbjmc28JaGzKya2ZB4g7tBoeykI3g aLAVzlSeCvfDLAAGVLZPZaWQuQTTvEaXCIG0wKx0SGr7rLJY+Lq2GzJ8mS69F2LD4i5IXK jxPDMbdGzrDr0y4ZDBGXIPgI6iCjK+I+JkT9u3ul4r+4eTYwXJqIW86mlBATMw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1630603813; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=l4OXxHSS6t5U5nwuovWTCY2ja46o+yNJJzT1B3bmr5Md5/9Q9KmEZf45WMY4bwWxZWrq2R Vx93dBLTTQHgFjUVjIAxnpUngKngfDuUFKKjmRCNDmZADCuMzFYoKOYmTyrrXQ+BW8h6Xl vp9mEOSc8WaEQDojoS/jtIR0TCYBh5G+bBM9cxvr55iTQp98xBBGpv9G4gJLHPPzdfozEf GQu6r8+9HxEfS0ttLV/Mej1j6s93l0eMTI79urqOF1Fb5wCBweTqzZqPOV6MVVv0E38pkb xPrpUFVAZ0vk+gTSRtnDVH7IOOnE6iTuUJm91J3CQrtaRAvxHBajsF1YcZ8NNg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=famulari.name header.s=mesmtp header.b=OatKOPhH; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm3 header.b=Ipp2kzeV; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.42 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=famulari.name header.s=mesmtp header.b=OatKOPhH; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm3 header.b=Ipp2kzeV; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: D80B0EB29 X-Spam-Score: -0.42 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: T+jIvbEf3oCS On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 12:51:58PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 06:50:36PM +0200, Xinglu Chen wrote: > > > Commit dates don't have a consistent meaning: are they the time of > > > first revision of a commit? Final revision of a commit? Time of > > > signing? Pushing? They are often useful to estimate a timeline, but > > > it's common for a Git "timeline" to jump back and forth by months or a > > > year due to long-running development branches being merged in, or due > > > to a "commit and then polish by rebasing" workflow. > > > > I would say the the time of the final commit would be the best option, > > but I agree that it can be ambiguous. Reading your message again, I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I wasn't asking what date we should choose to include in our package versions. I was asking, "What does the Git commit timestamp describe?" And the answer is that there is not a clear answer, and it depends on the workflow of the person who made the Git commit. My point being that a Git repo does not offer us meaningful information about when anything happened.