From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp11.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms5.migadu.com with LMTPS id aKNFGHjyumJRGQAAbAwnHQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:22:16 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp11.migadu.com with LMTPS id cLQ7GHjyumJNMwEA9RJhRA (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:22:16 +0200 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 D87EDB7A3 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:22:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50652 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o6AEQ-0005th-M0 for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 08:22:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58538) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o6AEC-0005s6-RD for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 08:22:02 -0400 Received: from andre.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:120:4::f00:15]:60810) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o6AEA-0006NV-Ea for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 08:22:00 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyhxw7psv60dyze.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:3c5f:2eff:feb0:ba5a]) by andre.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id ocMu2700B4UW6Th01cMuaP; Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:21:54 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Dealing with upstream issues From: Maxime Devos To: zimoun , Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Cc: Tobias Kortkamp , guix-devel@gnu.org Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:21:44 +0200 In-Reply-To: <865yklf3vq.fsf@gmail.com> References: <6d31ff958ec0c75cbba8324a275315d195a54902.1653045472.git.tobias.kortkamp@gmail.com> <87sfntu6ft.fsf@gnu.org> <87r13aifi3.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <6d2b1052b3e63a67c42c4e6ce431b3f1bb4b4605.camel@telenet.be> <865yklf3vq.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-wpshK8iNKORuC5oc85wP" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r22; t=1656418914; bh=lLKpajAt2xDbapjV85grfodtUGH73DhqFssVoplLiNc=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=I24LT9kAZYg8QFRa+ke4G9c2vkDL/7DM72yFQgZ08+l0uVoQKmuF99CP6nIir60fK H/i5sTaBo9GFVUqjW+JIRj95b9Xhf21TZn5sh0twDS8tsioJmJs/6WSHUFOpUsdg3J tzLX6h7Qq/SF/lXeNc/HxVZueNdCEIcZJrPxp33xYSeB5GVhEG5BWoP8n0IuAmnnoX wb2FB1PFrqJMbldQmkKTTi8HWxEY/XPOozZgRagNzDrrYs5nmPMlH6puIQQI532yS/ SD8s0V1YTb8TS9n4uaPQHME+wJxYsBj8HPnXVERhUn8/FIsdHTVmFF5vpKMEMj3oqs wGHFx/edodduQ== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:120:4::f00:15; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=andre.telenet-ops.be 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 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" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-To: larch@yhetil.org X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1656418935; 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=lLKpajAt2xDbapjV85grfodtUGH73DhqFssVoplLiNc=; b=CFKa4Ar8U73EKLr19RcAZ26SZYSRlcMAKHWJScBfbiUx2D8yfFtRWBTEeBBg7fr9NpijlS qdzJhiRhLXBnO99jytLiXcs6jnUr+06ELdwHNzDLqYbbZQgmai44SJ4uC75a1Wc/YJBoZK hinguK/GxJZDPfvHnNRActtEF+8sasAu6wxqHdH/1WMCT9Dx5WldA2OEDS+jtbaqwq+xec avwiyu7voTKuGGgxIjUwI5izN3Go8JjwiQKLswfDIZlZ0PiyLNwpm0BLV2DdUA2AQ/z55J iqB1wsdgjK6n76bVRVJYcDZWYrJXFWjQe9oDfR2tqEI0s3IGYjlItE+NkH8NxQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1656418935; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=EC8Gq5Ff7kFwZxua5KT15wegwN9+B9PLcabTZNOE9v1kDB8i1nZGEdmt3R0zQklNsfHiZS PaWbJ0QJAvB82akf+el54d1A13gB3o2dTOWuK6sQR1YfHf+kvHwNMbG8p6ozwZCzC9zfEW z9fPEF1LB3UfuSeaTuF1aWFfcDhx4sFi5EwKmlAJsJuBKxlqwmsgb4J3TlMzouA3fZw0vZ D4siTjekdvWq+428WRcmsE0boWBLuoAkTuH5fBqqzazNEik9UqHb6MqAbtyDXEaOXHCIQE Kj9pQyS+ka/CGisgblqc5WmHR5vN97oKkHkhNp9IIAzvV3Honvz1YoNwZAI7rQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r22 header.b=I24LT9kA; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; 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" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -10.05 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r22 header.b=I24LT9kA; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; 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" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: D87EDB7A3 X-Spam-Score: -10.05 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: ANuEm9Z/kmxU --=-wpshK8iNKORuC5oc85wP Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable zimoun schreef op di 28-06-2022 om 13:01 [+0200]: > Well, from my understanding, the question is: should a perfectly working > and fine submission be delayed because unrelated-to-Guix issues are in > upstream code? This is not the question. The dispute is about: Maxime Devos: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/55541#3 > AFAICT the issues have not been reported upstream yet, so I don't > think we can close this entry on debbugs yet.=20 zimoun: > Ludo said these unrelated-to-Guix issues are not blocker, from my > understandings.=C2=A0 And I agree.=C2=A0 Do you disagree? I agree too. What I disagree with, is ignoring the bug. The blocker for me is: appropriate parties need to be at least informed of bug if it isn't fixed. > You are commenting on =E2=80=9Cstandard=E2=80=9D which somehow asks about= explicit > criteria. And, you are implicitly commenting on blocking while > issues from upstream are not fixed. Instead of trying to deduce > myself (and probably the wrong way), could you please explicitly > write down your arguments? Reviewer noticed a $bug. This kind of $bug has two accepted and standard methods for addressing it: (1) fix it (by replacing the configure script or patching it or sufficient substitute*). (a) in Guix (often work-around-ish, though often a work-around is sufficient for these kind of cross-compilation problems) (b) upstream (more work, sometimes more fulfilling, sometimes not=C2= =A0 worth it (2) report it upstream (because it's more complicated than a simple 'substitute*'. Why? It's a bug, needs to be fixed somehow, and for (2): we can't solve everything ourselves. What happened: Committer pushed changed, ignoring (1) and (2). /me: What? Why ignore the bugs? Greetings, Maxime. --=-wpshK8iNKORuC5oc85wP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYrryWBccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7rmNAQCzTskHH0VnUdKcWSfH+9HIvxNp gI7DwcmY87PqW7VoyAEAhNuMe0C6PXMhKhaw/NcbDB61DMoWYI/9XcRiI+ikGgM= =5Sfh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-wpshK8iNKORuC5oc85wP--