[bug#73197] [PATCH] gnu: julia: Update to 1.9.3.

[Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1656 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:29:41PM +0200, Simon Tournier wrote:
> Hi Ludo,
> 
> On lun., 16 sept. 2024 at 11:47, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> > I would hope we can migrate straight to 1.9, but if that’s too tricky, I
> > agree we should follow the plan you describe.
> >
> > Let me take a look at those failure to see how bad it is.
> 
> I would suggest to have julia-next.
> 
> And some ’package-with-julia’ transformation similar as
> package-with-python or package-with-ocaml.
> 
> Somehow, that’s always painful to upgrade Julia because of the Julia
> world rebuild and some (more than some?) package breakages.
> 
> That way it would easier to have the CI following the branch team-julia
> where regular package would go, as well as julia-next upgrade.  And the
> manifest could build both set of packages (julia and julia-next) using
> the transformation.
> 
> Users willing stable just install ’julia’ and ’julia-’ packages.
> Adventurous users install ’julia-next’ and ’julia-*-next’.
> 
> WDYT?

The problem is that the julia-build-system needs to be adapted to the
newer versions of Julia. IMO the benefit of having Julia and Julia-next
is that the julia-* packages are packaged, but those needing a newer
version of Julia can still get it from Guix. Then when we adapt the
julia-build-system we can deprecate julia-next, or have it point to the
next release.

-- 
Efraim Flashner   <efraim@flashner.co.il>   רנשלפ םירפא
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D  14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]