From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms8.migadu.com with LMTPS id yL+kAH+3rmUtTQAAqHPOHw:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:44:15 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:303:e224::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0.migadu.com with LMTPS id yL+kAH+3rmUtTQAAqHPOHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:44:15 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=RkKaLiVH; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=riseup.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1705949054; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=76i/ImzEGBjqHiDlgKr2LoHqJMS0ACX2n0dzVJ/qf+Y=; b=NPvo0TVR6hHCR+OB5tcCrNcq1nPV3UP06N1SIreyhulICFq3frDUsuiKVvqjH+HdqdNtcN HiskAENl7SV16A6DL0qL9Lf9b0ERaxF73RXOlu+zQpNeAnmKjRuQN2xanDtBvcxTrwNTRS LLm4PLhYWZ65y/O/g/KS3EiiE9OA8iCvY8j0an+WLGVs7zibU1CMbDqXj1i5ERMooahaU0 ijceLXcE68HUHQUp0o+wwvkzqFb2OpIBwexPIKbR8hDo767A2y1aEA5ttBntsLGtsXijU6 +HSpoYxi8G7UQ+lIGeMz45+Re4Cer/s8shS1vK097n9F6YS25/quGcj3EvdMLQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=RkKaLiVH; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=riseup.net (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1705949054; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=PjtC8THNxVZKAEfVR3QQ1i0T5XXk1jNo/uHQ0eGWbX0RxiP7KNEzCXOtOUyntgm2mdRJQY 2eqWYCIj3Wz3JZY6QpSedePHjcwE9MAGDL84f5oYtYGo5Pk//F4km//PEoRh/7CAGVAC1k PGjX7gFtC3+nI6USEKLF06NChey5ZJIOIss2ao0n5oD97FogV5DDUTlaeTZR5KRJ5r3ucx jDnoRFs4rYxDcQ3snXiRKI9Am7HnakdsBqM9LyhMTj87NNNaO2o7v5S8BjsBgFRoc+/OWy 0G1GK7y0GP+cjUaJROwsJJrjLueZ0Zj/+EhAIec/1stgKb/KBYcnwPfZ4+olfg== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B52021DEF9 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:44:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rRzH8-0006DT-Ok; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:44:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rRzH4-00067x-Pb for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:43:59 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rRzH4-0006or-HY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:43:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rRzH8-0003xk-AY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:44:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#68577] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: icecat: Improve inheritance. Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Batista Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:44:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 68577 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Mark H Weaver Cc: 68577@debbugs.gnu.org, Jonathan Brielmaier , =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Lassieur , Ian Eure Received: via spool by 68577-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B68577.170594901615191 (code B ref 68577); Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:44:02 +0000 Received: (at 68577) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jan 2024 18:43:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41790 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rRzGh-0003ww-FF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:43:36 -0500 Received: from mx0.riseup.net ([198.252.153.6]:33162) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rRzGd-0003wc-7u for 68577@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 13:43:33 -0500 Received: from fews02-sea.riseup.net (fews02-sea-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.112]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx0.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TJfHX6sTtz9wjC; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:43:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1705949001; bh=XKtNsCCef++N8tx1lMmtNLZPINykhXA8OE4Ccf8wtjI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=RkKaLiVHRk5xFMSx0eVYYUA3vhua8B7AvWTtwBFQNGA849hZ3h0FRD/9q9SvNb8CZ VHh+GIympo11t+yN3J5CSLD/XrRAiPX+EeRwt3yb+HMY72BfdETiBE2hh3f/quJ6+L Gsxjw4RsXEJtK7M1qVGrnxfl7ZXP2qRGwhI5z56I= X-Riseup-User-ID: 3E89FE1A71401FB17325B8F5F14B02DC63F21A7E35066C94A0980233563C49DC Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews02-sea.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4TJfHW2RFRzFwCx; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:43:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 15:42:56 -0300 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Batista Message-ID: References: <87ttn5nbkj.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87ttn5nbkj.fsf@netris.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: 4.23 X-Spam-Score: 4.23 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: B52021DEF9 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx12.migadu.com X-TUID: fcLb2K9/UiVM Hi Mark, seg 22 jan 2024 às 01:09:21 (1705896561), mhw@netris.org enviou: > Hi Clément, > > I see now that in November, you added 'torbrowser', which inherits from > 'icecat-minimal'. > > > commit 756ba0429e84ee0f8ce30484439b78c00c61d286 > > Author: Clément Lassieur > > Date: Sun Nov 12 02:23:27 2023 +0100 > > > > gnu: Add torbrowser. > > > > * gnu/packages/tor.scm (torbrowser): New variable. > > (torbrowser-assets): New variable. > > * gnu/packages/browser-extensions.scm (noscript): New variable. > > (noscript/icecat): New variable. > > > > Co-authored-by: André Batista > > Change-Id: I73dc53905e4a028108bb34aae07e44256cf16c85 > > Did you consult me on this change? I don't remember seeing anything > about this in my mailbox. > > This change concerns me, because it compels me to coordinate with you > when making nontrivial IceCat updates. As things stand now, it seems > that the 'icecat' and 'torbrowser' packages must be updated together, > in lock step. > > Also, do 'torbrowser' and 'mullvad' both comply with the requirements of > the GNU FSDG? For example, do they support EME? Do they steer the user > to nonfree software, e.g. nonfree addons. Considering I was cc'ed and part of the thread that led to that patch, I'll consider myself invited to give a piece of my mind on your comments. First things first: when I sent the very first version of this patch, I didn't use inheritance anywhere and it was actually suggested to me as an improvement over what I had done[1]. I agreed to it and changed my patch to inherit from Icecat. Way later, Clément followed on the same reasoning and previous discussions on the thread. No one opposed it. Looking back, it is true I should have probably known better and have you cc'ed right from the start. My code was heavily based on / similar to Icecat's package definition and so it made sense to avoid duplication. I didn't know and did not care to look who were the contributors to Icecat's definition. I see now that I was careless and that my behaviour could be seen as disrespectful. No disrespect was intended, but I certainly could have done better and I do apologize for my shortcomings. Clément's rescue of that thread was a lesson to me in that they made an effort to put forward all previous work and give clear attribution to others[2]. I was certainly glad they cc'ed me and gave me attribution even though I think it would have been legitimate if they had done otherwise since their code was sufficiently distinct from mine. Now, do you believe me when I say that there was no ill will towards you or others? I ask this because your last comments strike me on the opposite sense. Risking to add insult to injury, but in the hopes of gaining your help, I'd say that your comments appear to be assuming ill intention on our part towards you and somewhat belittle you at the same time. Why do you assume to be compelled to do anything if you were not even cc'ed? As things stand, my assumption here is that the burden would be on us to either ask you directly or to keep a close eye on any changes done to Icecat. IMO, you certainly wouldn't be to blame if you changed something on Icecat and torbrowser/mullvad/librewolf had some issue. We would. You have put a very good point in saying that it could be better for us to disentangle those packages to avoid future surprises and lessen maintainance burden, but the way you wrote it seemed to imply that we were trying to forcefully push work upon you, with little evidence of that being the case. On the other hand, would it really be that much of added work if we were to ask you to copy us when proposing some changes to Icecat? Would it be presumptuous or forceful to ask that? In my view it wouldn't as it also wouldn't be any obligation of yours to comply with it. If you said: "I'll try to remeber, but cannot guarantee it, so do your part and keep an eye on Icecat", that would've been fine to me at least. More than that, it suprises me that after discovering these threads and having a good amount of knowledge on building Icecat you've decided to just lash out on us, instead of trying to be of help, reviewing the proposed patches or letting we learn from our short-sightedness the hard way. Maybe you have too much on your plate already, maybe you thought we were neglectful, irresponsible. Maybe past experiences made you say what you said. Whatever it is, I feel your approach to it was a bit antagonistic towards us for the reasons I've put above. You are not compelled to answer me nor to give any thought to my feelings. You owe me nothing. However, I know your help would be more valuable to guixen than mine, were you willing and in a situation to do so. So please, if possible, help us out. If not, please take care not to put others down or against you. Even the ablest of programmers can benefit from the good will of those of lesser abilities. At least that's what I believe and what I wanted to communicate to you here in the hopes to have a net gain for us all. Kind regards, 1. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/2020-09/msg00261.html 2. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/2023-12/msg00669.html