From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Woodcroft Subject: Re: [PATCH] 11 little Ruby gems. Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:27:20 +1000 Message-ID: <561DBD88.7020502@uq.edu.au> References: <5613E0C7.1020607@uq.edu.au> <5614E0F5.2090509@uq.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53163) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmBmv-0002e0-Gk for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:27:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmBms-0006Rm-BX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:27:33 -0400 Received: from mailhub2.soe.uq.edu.au ([130.102.132.209]:60015 helo=newmailhub.uq.edu.au) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZmBmr-0006RW-Pw for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 22:27:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel On 14/10/15 00:08, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > The only thing that=E2=80=99s missing is adding an entry > for you to the copyright header at the top of the file. (I can amend > your first patch in this series to include this line.) > > Since there haven=E2=80=99t been any objections so far I=E2=80=99ll pus= h them soon. Ta. >> Can I ask, would it be helpful to alphabetize the packages in ruby.scm= , >> at least vaguely? Always adding new packages to the bottom of the file >> causes git merge conflicts I would imagine. Of course, it would be eve= n >> more helpful if guix import put them in the right spot too, but that >> seems harder. > I=E2=80=99m also fighting with merge conflicts somewhat regularly, e.g.= when > editing some heavily edited file like the huge python.scm. I avoid muc= h > of the problems by adding my packages somewhere to the middle in > alphabetic order. I do not do this when I have patch sequences where > the latter depend on the former. > > Ordering package variables in ruby.scm doesn=E2=80=99t seem very useful= to me. > More could be gained, I suppose, by using a sexp-aware diff algorithm. OK - merge conflicts don't seem to be much of a problem for me=20 personally as someone who is only submitting occasional patches.