Re: Guile 2.0.13

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1130 bytes --]

On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 08:13:12PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:11:38PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> > 
> > More generally, we could try to have a “staging” branch for safe changes
> > that involve a rebuild of between ~300 and ~1200 packages, that we’d
> > merge more frequently than ‘core-updates’ (I think the Nix folks do
> > that).  By “safe” I mean things like ungrafting, minor upgrades and
> > improvements; the goal would be to reduce the latency for such changes.
> > 
> > Things that rebuild more than ~1200 packages would still go to
> > ‘core-updates’.
> > 
> > WDYT?
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > Ludo’.
> > 
> 
> This sounds like a good idea in general. A quick `guix refresh -l cmake'
> showed ~1100 packages, which would make this a good spot for the patch I
> tossed into core-updates to also build the ccmake binary.

+1

> Currently I think most of us try to keep the number of rebuilds under
> ~150, so it might be nice to have some sort of guidelines in a separate
> post (and in HACKING eventually) so that people don't miss it.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]