From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57352) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dFPQd-0003Kh-7X for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 29 May 2017 14:30:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dFPQZ-00083z-3N for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 29 May 2017 14:30:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:40995) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dFPQZ-00083t-04 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 29 May 2017 14:30:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dFPQY-0002Cz-Kc for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 29 May 2017 14:30:02 -0400 Subject: bug#27123: fonts: more changes to font-build-system, one follow up commit Resent-Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:45 +0000 From: ng0 Message-ID: <20170529182845.rswiqxqcfc3ll4sv@abyayala> References: <20170528205754.53cta22ho7ddmjnd@abyayala> <07bb4605.AEEALIAeSwcAAAAAAAAAAAPFwUoAAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZLF7L@mailjet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <07bb4605.AEEALIAeSwcAAAAAAAAAAAPFwUoAAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZLF7L@mailjet.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: 27123@debbugs.gnu.org Arun Isaac transcribed 0.7K bytes: > > Thanks for the patches! Patches 1, 3 and 4 LGTM. Ok. > Patch 2... > > > * gnu/packages/fonts.scm (font-awesome)[source]: Switch to the source on github as the previous zip file > > is updated in place, resulting in a changed hash sum. > > This commit message line is too long. On emacs, you can wrap it to the > next line with `fill-paragraph'. Yeah, git commit message has no limit, otherwise I wrap at 70. > The contents of the zip archive are updated in place without changing > the version number? Is that what you mean by "in place"? > > Should we treat this as a one-time accident by upstream? Or have they > made a habit out of this? > > IMO, we should forgive them this one time, and if they do this again, > then we can move to their github release archive. WDYT? > It looks like this is done regulary, at least from their setup. The 'assets' directory on the website where the zip file is contained in comes from the tar.gz source. I don't really think this patch should be applied, but we should monitor the situation. -- ng0 OpenPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588