From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 2LtrI/1eMl/ocgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:03:57 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id YNqiHf1eMl/wBgAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:03:57 +0000 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 288A89404E2 for ; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:03:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:60204 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k5QCK-0001d6-5J for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 05:03:56 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49352) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k5Q9X-0006IK-Co for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 05:01:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:55324) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k5Q9W-0005nU-US for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 05:01:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1k5Q9W-0002W0-GK for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 05:01:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#42792] [PATCH] gnu: Add python-pydantic. Resent-From: Tanguy Le Carrour Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:01:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 42792 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 42792-done@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 42792-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D42792.15971364299619 (code D ref 42792); Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:01:02 +0000 Received: (at 42792-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Aug 2020 09:00:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38637 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1k5Q8y-0002V5-T1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 05:00:29 -0400 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.197]:46361) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1k5Q8v-0002Um-53 for 42792-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 05:00:26 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 176.185.184.238 Received: from localhost (static-176-185-184-238.ftth.abo.bbox.fr [176.185.184.238]) (Authenticated sender: tanguy@bioneland.org) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0BA981C0017; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:00:18 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 11:00:18 +0200 From: Tanguy Le Carrour Message-ID: <20200811090018.2tlkd2k4ken7r637@melmoth> References: <20200810084343.10734-1-tanguy@bioneland.org> <87wo26g6ji.fsf@gnu.org> <20200810141911.jtpjdeylftxiyk6q@rafflesia> <87h7t9y3yv.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87h7t9y3yv.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) 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" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.51 X-TUID: 8ZWJm84XXvhY Hi Mathieu, Le 08/11, Mathieu Othacehe a écrit : > Hey Tanguy, > > >> (uri (git-reference > >> (url "https://github.com/samuelcolvin/pydantic") > >> - (commit (string-append "v" version)))) > >> + (commit (string-append "v" version)))) > >> (file-name (git-file-name name version)) > >> - (sha256 (base32 "1380s9k77g6q15by9fkxndczjk89q6xpz09jdrqip535xws2z3j8")))) > >> + (sha256 > >> + (base32 "1380s9k77g6q15by9fkxndczjk89q6xpz09jdrqip535xws2z3j8")))) > > > > Thanks for paying attention to every details!! > > Actually, those things have been bothering me for quiet a while… > > They are not reported by `./pre-inst-env guix lint python-pydantic` or > > fixed by `emacs --script etc/indent-code.el gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm python-pydantic`. :-( > > The first diff is fixed when running "./etc/indent-code.el > gnu/packages/python-xyz.scm python-pydantic" for me. > > > > > Would the following have been acceptable? > > > > ``` > >> + (sha256 (base32 > >> + "1380s9k77g6q15by9fkxndczjk89q6xpz09jdrqip535xws2z3j8")))) > > ``` > > It is acceptable but the convention is to put "base32" on the next line. > > > > > And what about this? (2-space indent instead of 1, like `add-before` below) > > > > ``` > >> + (sha256 > >> + (base32 "1380s9k77g6q15by9fkxndczjk89q6xpz09jdrqip535xws2z3j8")))) > > ``` > > No only one space here, this is also handled by the indent script for me. Actually, I think there might be a problem with the way I use the script, because it does not fix anything!? :-( And before you say it, I know, I should be using Emacs and not Vim! ;-) I've considered moving to Emacs as my dev environment (not as my text editor), but there are so many things I have to set up to feel at home: evil, python, fuzzy file search… I hope I'll have some time to work on this later this month. > >> (build-system python-build-system) > >> (arguments > >> '(#:phases > >> (modify-phases %standard-phases > >> - ;; Reported upstream: > >> - ;; Not sure how to apply the suggested fix!? > >> + ;; Reported upstream: > >> + ;; . > >> + ;; Disable the faulty test as the fix is unclear. > > > > Much better, thanks! > > In retrospect, I realize that I should have put the question in the > > commit message for a maintainer to read, not in the package definition. > > Would that have been better?! > > No it's perfectly fine in the package declaration :) > > Hope I'm not bothering you to much with this boring syntactic stuff :p Not at all! I actually very much appreciate the fact that people take the time to review and discuss contributions! Regards -- Tanguy