[bug#46113] [PATCH] gnu: obs: Update obs to fb347c.

[guix-patches--- via <guix-patches@gnu.org>]

Hi Andrew,

Andrew Tropin <andrew@trop.in> writes:

>> Should we wait for the next OBS release instead of packaging an
>> arbitrary commit?
>
> I'm not in a hurry, but as I explained earlier in this thread [fn:2] it seems
> relatively safe for me to use this commit and getting back later to
> 26.1.3 or 26.2.0 or whatever next release will be.
>
>> I am not insist on keeping [1], but I do think that is more cleaner
>> solution.
>
> In terms of implememntation I like that [fn:1] prevents double loading
> of plugins, by excluding obs installation dir from "load-path". However
> double loading of the same plugin doesn't seem to break anything. Also,
> OBS_PLUGINS_DIRECTORY variable name maybe a little better than
> OBS_PLUGINS_PATH as it contains only one path.
>
> The problem is that now there are two almost identical mechanisms (one
> in upstream and one via patch [fn:1]), which can bring some maintanance
> problems in the future.
>
> There are two good option in my opinion:
> - contribute patch from [fn:1] to upstream (reverting OBS_PLUGINS_PATH)

I would go with this one. But the thing is that [fn:1] is specific and
makes sense only for guix. At least from my point of view. So I doubt
that the upstream accept it. But you can try for sure.

> - revert [fn:1] and use OBS_PLUGINS_PATH from upstream
>
> If Alexey ready to contibute OBS_PLUGINS_DIRECTORY patch to obs
> (reverting OBS_PLUGINS_PATH), I would be glad to support it. Otherwise,
> I would prefer to revert [fn:1] and apply this one. To prevent
> maintanance problems in the future.

As I am not a regular obs user, I am afraid I won't be able to find time
for this soon. Feel free to use/delete/revert [fn:1]. It is your call.

> * Footnotes
>
> [fn:2] http://issues.guix.gnu.org/46113 
>
> [fn:1] https://issues.guix.gnu.org/45707 
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew Tropin

-- 
Alexey