From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40822) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ihLOr-0007Zc-6q for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:33:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihLOp-0003qn-7n for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:33:04 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36520) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihLOn-0003nP-TP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:33:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ihLOn-00065D-Ra for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:33:01 -0500 Subject: bug#38630: Software Heritage (swh): Fix API change, causing repeatedly submitting archives Resent-To: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 23:32:40 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_?= =?UTF-8?Q?H=C3=B6fling?= Message-ID: <20191217233240.09d4166a@alma-ubu> In-Reply-To: <87h81yrjkv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20191215223433.5ce5be20@alma-ubu> <87h81yrjkv.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/o+IG6tNQ+q2IBgqEgTGhVrX"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" 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: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 38630-done@debbugs.gnu.org --Sig_/o+IG6tNQ+q2IBgqEgTGhVrX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:41:04 +0100 Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > > I have not communicated with SWH about that, especially I have not > > asked SWH why they broke the API without updating the version > > number. =20 >=20 > Yeah, that=E2=80=99s weird, I=E2=80=99ve pinged them on IRC. >=20 > It seems that the removal was intentional as part of > , but it wasn=E2=80=99t clear > whether the API breakage should have happened. This led them to open > a new task: . We should > keep an eye on it. I will be frequently linting and see what's happening :-) [..] > In the meantime, your patch looks like the right move, so you can > push it. Thanks for your review and further information, pushed as 356a79becc4061d158c68718ad169abac1ab672f Closing this ticket. Bj=C3=B6rn --Sig_/o+IG6tNQ+q2IBgqEgTGhVrX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQQiGUP0np8nb5SZM4K/KGy2WT5f/QUCXflXiAAKCRC/KGy2WT5f /e0ZAKC1v1xhBRgrZXBJBZ3Wcebj7HH99QCeJjpqgcd0IohBPDvsQ1ewmoKBArg= =/YrK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/o+IG6tNQ+q2IBgqEgTGhVrX--