Re: [PATCH] 11 little Ruby gems.

[Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>]

Ben Woodcroft <b.woodcroft@uq.edu.au> writes:

> On 07/10/15 04:25, Thompson, David wrote:
>> In short, yes, your patches are very welcome. Thanks! - Dave 
>
> Here ya go then.

These are beautiful!  The only thing that’s missing is adding an entry
for you to the copyright header at the top of the file.  (I can amend
your first patch in this series to include this line.)

Since there haven’t been any objections so far I’ll push them soon.

> Can I ask, would it be helpful to alphabetize the packages in ruby.scm, 
> at least vaguely? Always adding new packages to the bottom of the file 
> causes git merge conflicts I would imagine. Of course, it would be even 
> more helpful if guix import put them in the right spot too, but that 
> seems harder.

I’m also fighting with merge conflicts somewhat regularly, e.g. when
editing some heavily edited file like the huge python.scm.  I avoid much
of the problems by adding my packages somewhere to the middle in
alphabetic order.  I do not do this when I have patch sequences where
the latter depend on the former.

Ordering package variables in ruby.scm doesn’t seem very useful to me.
More could be gained, I suppose, by using a sexp-aware diff algorithm.

~~ Ricardo