From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1e7r-0005f3-IW for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 15:54:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1e7m-0007SM-Lu for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 15:54:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:49996) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1e7m-0007SC-CC for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 15:54:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e1e7m-0006Wp-0V for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 15:54:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#28739] [PATCH 0/5] Update python{,2}-a* Resent-Message-ID: Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 15:53:19 -0400 From: Leo Famulari Message-ID: <20171009195319.GB22410@jasmine.lan> References: <20171008043545.9511-1-tipecaml@gmail.com> <20171009192223.GC16949@jasmine.lan> <18bba7d8-4ae6-4005-56b3-f398440312ac@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18bba7d8-4ae6-4005-56b3-f398440312ac@gmail.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Cyril Roelandt Cc: 28739@debbugs.gnu.org --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 09:49:13PM +0200, Cyril Roelandt wrote: > Hehe. So, to give a bit more context: I'm trying to write an updated > version of my Guix backend for tox (the Python virtual environment > manager). One of the issues I have when trying it on real-world projects > is that our Python libraries are a bit outdated. Yeah, I'm glad you're working on this. > If it's OK with everybody, I'd like to push the simplest patches (those > that only change the version and the hash) without going through a > review first. WDYT? Sure, I think it's fine. HACKING says: For patches that just add a new package, and a simple one, it=E2=80=99s OK = to commit [without going through the code review process], if you=E2=80=99re confident (which means you successfully built it in a chroot setup, and have done a reasonable copyright and license auditing.) Likewise for package upgrades, except upgrades that trigger a lot of rebuilds (for example, upgrading GnuTLS or GLib.) We have a mailing list for commit notifications (guix-commits@gnu.org), so people can notice. Before pushing your changes, make sure to run =E2=80=98git pull --rebase=E2=80=99. --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEsFFZSPHn08G5gDigJkb6MLrKfwgFAlnb068ACgkQJkb6MLrK fwgmrA/+MJAG3p6fp1HhTAxjTHSakfqzzP8BvgjCybQnvu8sOtw+aFL4zRPRXjEO FVQB0wmZWQSSj5VqS/Uhdrc8MJD5KprRN1/HN+4DIVih+JjRHeZG2ZW2MafOOufs 3m538cHlUrDj13HczhZZCvn/53Eh0xnN2g6YO0dFZpBe/nuI3FuS0yHp0CBwF/VW eLhMcIt1lmayBnAPkqJgNFS1fAn3whTcimTXH4AfEiLse2yAHLUMR0B9xFNiFR5B bYW5OQto32mzVqpfKvzHeFuztCw1Ai0ma8inxzp5sAbbi4I2dZO1mTQ7a3f85bEE vFveXDYkVqiFLFTanBL7Nzn2Y99XlLcL0lAz3xGOcaB4QXtxyUU5xUzT7Jekxc4n ZekAj0fDHtS3zGst/K/tzLxcLa6xYg/YAqZ5avXzqEjBXnSdsYyeIVWjgeUY95vc DE3JN2ZKFhWfJsHxScSkckj2QxpGuYLUQBgP2/rPumG/L/eilYj/cVztYKHvgPtk Q0iUtN89jlVtUk+/j3hRSzVtELktWIcjstG2uXD64L0OyQAzuQZsvtDq3BVIQAw+ chVSAcHD/+RJtVb+c2Ov8v05oIuK4KXGSPP0S+tW8qsuHD65gvPg8ma8phaYboKA hzmXWEwdx01OsKPZyc9QshHHFydJF7Kziq5T3KBuMIxC+LYLOm4= =JssG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU--