From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36675)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i5nO4-0003WD-6P
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 04:45:05 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i5nO2-0005UZ-LA
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 04:45:04 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54105)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1i5nO2-0005UH-D9
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 04:45:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i5nO2-0001JZ-5K
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 04:45:02 -0400
Subject: [bug#36851] [PATCH] Add rclone-browser
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.36851.B36851.15676730955029@debbugs.gnu.org>
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
References: <87blxcos1n.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87a7bk5jsl.fsf@gnu.org>
 <87a7bkoxjs.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 10:44:46 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87a7bkoxjs.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of
 "Wed, 04 Sep 2019 18:07:03 +0200")
Message-ID: <87y2z3gmip.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Cc: 36851@debbugs.gnu.org

Hello,

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> skribis:

> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> * gnu/packages/sync.scm (rclone-browser): New variable.
>>
>> LGTM!
>
> Thank you for the review.
>
>> Note that, as noted in =E2=80=98HACKING=E2=80=99, it=E2=80=99s the kind =
of change that you can
>> push quickly if you don=E2=80=99t get any feedback.
>
> Well, this one had a question: should I also propagate `rclone'? Since
> I wasn't sure about it, I didn't applied the patch.

Oh indeed, sorry.  The general rule is that propagation should be
avoided as much as possible.  Is there a way you could =E2=80=98substitute*=
=E2=80=99 the
reference to =E2=80=98rclone=E2=80=99 in =E2=80=98rclone-browser=E2=80=99?

> Also, there is an issue : according to
> <https://martins.ninja/RcloneBrowser/>, the project is no longer active
> nor maintained.
>
> Should we bother anymore and package it?

It depends.  In general we=E2=80=99d rather not package unmaintained softwa=
re.
However, there are cases where people do rely on unmaintained software,
for better or worse.

If you think that there=E2=80=99s no other options that fits the bill for y=
ou as
a user, maybe it=E2=80=99s a sign that we should package it, possibly remov=
ing
it later down the road.  Otherwise, perhaps we shouldn=E2=80=99t bother.

WDYT?

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.