[bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[Simon Tournier]

Hi,

On sam., 28 janv. 2023 at 20:16, Andy Tai <lichengtai@gmail.com> wrote:

> close 59093

Why do you close it?  And then you open #61134 [1] with the same patch.

1: <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/61134>


Cheers,
simon

[bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[Andy Tai]

I did it so Guix QA can pick it up to queue it for testing.

Guix QA seemed confused about the old bug, always in a failed state

On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 4:47 AM Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On sam., 28 janv. 2023 at 20:16, Andy Tai <lichengtai@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > close 59093
>
> Why do you close it?  And then you open #61134 [1] with the same patch.
>
> 1: <http://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/61134>
>
>
> Cheers,
> simon

[bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[Simon Tournier]

Hi,

On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 at 07:35, Andy Tai <lichengtai@gmail.com> wrote:

> Guix QA seemed confused about the old bug, always in a failed state

It appears to me better to point the issues and then maybe fix them
instead of bypassing them.  My 2 cents.

Cheers,
simon

[bug#61134] [bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[Andy Tai]

you meant fixing the issue in Guix QA?

It goes without saying that Guix QA is far from the code in question
of this issue and my question on Guix QA also went unanswered on the
mailing list.



On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 3:36 AM Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 at 07:35, Andy Tai <lichengtai@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Guix QA seemed confused about the old bug, always in a failed state
>
> It appears to me better to point the issues and then maybe fix them
> instead of bypassing them.  My 2 cents.
>
> Cheers,
> simon

[bug#61134] [bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[Andy Tai]

To clarify, when I mentioned Guix QA shows failure, Guiox QA was
showing "failure" trying to queue the issue to build, not that Gux QA
was showing some build log with the patch failing to build in some
way.

So I don't know if you are saying people should look at Guix QA
sources and help to fix that.  That is possible, of course, but people
contributing to Guix patches may have no background at all at how Guix
QA works.

On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 9:15 AM Andy Tai <atai@atai.org> wrote:
>
> you meant fixing the issue in Guix QA?
>
> It goes without saying that Guix QA is far from the code in question
> of this issue and my question on Guix QA also went unanswered on the
> mailing list.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 3:36 AM Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 at 07:35, Andy Tai <lichengtai@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Guix QA seemed confused about the old bug, always in a failed state
> >
> > It appears to me better to point the issues and then maybe fix them
> > instead of bypassing them.  My 2 cents.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > simon



-- 
Andy Tai, atai@atai.org, Skype: licheng.tai, Line: andy_tai, WeChat: andytai1010
Year 2023 民國112年
自動的精神力是信仰與覺悟
自動的行為力是勞動與技能

[bug#61134] [bug#59093] [PATCH] Add motif and xnedit

[Simon Tournier]

Hi Andy,

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 at 10:12, Andy Tai <atai@atai.org> wrote:
> To clarify, when I mentioned Guix QA shows failure, Guiox QA was
> showing "failure" trying to queue the issue to build, not that Gux QA
> was showing some build log with the patch failing to build in some
> way.
>
> So I don't know if you are saying people should look at Guix QA
> sources and help to fix that.  That is possible, of course, but people
> contributing to Guix patches may have no background at all at how Guix
> QA works.

I have understood the first time. :-)

I wrote: «It appears to me better to point the issues and then maybe fix
them instead of bypassing them.  My 2 cents.»

I am not saying that you should fix issues with QA, obviously not.
Instead, I am proposing that if you notice something unexpected with QA,
you should report it and not silently bypass it.

“Report it” means for example drop an email to guix-devel or open a bug
or roam on #guix and tell.  I do not know what is the best and it does
not mean that the issue about QA will be fixed.  It just helps in
improving the tools, IMHO.

Well, for what it is worth, I am trying to say that silently close and
reopen another ticket because QA does not behave as expected is a
short-term hack – and yes it is often necessary to have the task done
now :-) – but by silently closing it does not help for the longer term.

Thanks for your contributions and taking the time to discuss how we
could collectively improve Guix. :-)

Cheers,
simon