From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45875) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1elGWV-00058x-Jj for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:00:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1elGWR-0004S2-AM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:00:07 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:60212) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1elGWR-0004RD-7a for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:00:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1elGWQ-00009T-Nf for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:00:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#30340] [PATCH 1/6] gnu: qtbase: Use the store paths for other packages and dynamically loaded libs. Resent-Message-ID: References: <20180203192212.29173-1-h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> <20180203192505.29516-1-h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com> <87mv0i1do0.fsf@gnu.org> From: Hartmut Goebel Message-ID: <30c8ed79-2d93-9160-1006-94e9dac8fe03@crazy-compilers.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:59:16 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87mv0i1do0.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US 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: 30340@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Ludo, Am 09.02.2018 um 14:43 schrieb Ludovic Courtès: > This sounds like a great improvement! Thanks. > I don’t understand all of this (does it describe problems or solutions? > what does it mean “files are not patches”? etc.) and I think we should > describe the problems/solutions on their own, without “NixOS does this” > comments, which isn’t really helpful IMO. > > As an aside, I think explanations when they’re needed, should go in the > source, not in the commit log. My idea is to use the commit message to document: "We reviewed the NixOS patches as of 2018-01-09, and this is what we decided how to handle the respective changes." (This might still be worth rewriting.) This will give confidence that all patches are considered to the ones working on this next. In contrast the code comments only document the actual code for the case one doesn't cares about how/whether the code follows NixOS. (As you already commented.)  you mean patches 2, 3, 5 and 6 are unnecessary? I'm not even sure it we'd better remove all the refernces to NixOs from this change and only document it in commit messages. We could group these few commits into a (very short) branch, drop patches 2, 3, 5 and 6, and documenting "considered all NixOS patched: Not needed, … etc." in the merge-commit: * Merge branch 'nixos patches for Qt 5.9' into master. |\ | * gnu: qtserialport: Use the store paths for dynamically | * gnu: qtbase: Use the store paths for |/ The comments currently in patch 2, 3, 5, and 6 would into the Merge commit's message. WDYT? > I think you can remove “TODO” here. ACK. > Did you notice improvements on KDE applications? KDE Plasma feels to be more stable with these changes applied. I can't proof it's these changes, since I have a similar series for KF5. -- Regards Hartmut Goebel | Hartmut Goebel | h.goebel@crazy-compilers.com | | www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |