From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42391) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dd2Xh-0003Ha-23 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 18:55:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dd2Xe-00048F-FZ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 18:55:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:36438) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dd2Xe-000488-4a for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 18:55:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dd2Xd-00012X-R9 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2017 18:55:01 -0400 Subject: [bug#27898] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Use 'modify-phases' syntax. Resent-Message-ID: From: Marius Bakke In-Reply-To: <20170802224614.GC14798@jasmine.lan> References: <871sov69jq.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20170801072153.19077-1-kei@openmailbox.org> <87mv7hwzqu.fsf@fastmail.com> <20170802194148.GB13105@jasmine.lan> <87fud9wx59.fsf@fastmail.com> <20170802224614.GC14798@jasmine.lan> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:54:13 +0200 Message-ID: <8760e5wpgq.fsf@fastmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" 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: Leo Famulari Cc: Kei Kebreau , 27898@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Leo Famulari writes: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 10:08:18PM +0200, Marius Bakke wrote: >> Leo Famulari writes: >> > I agree, wow! Thanks for this. It should help new Schemers to feel more >> > comfortable editing packages. >> > >> > This might be annoying but it should wait until after the core-updates >> > branch is done and merged into the master branch. I want to minimize t= he >> > number of merge conflicts because they are 1) annoying and 2) relative= ly >> > opaque when reading the Git history. Marius's suggestion is another go= od >> > one, and would help with issues like that. >> > >> > But if we were to wait until after core-updates and push it as one >> > commit, I wouldn't mind. It's up to the two of you and everyone else :) >>=20 >> Yeah I guess the squashed patch is okay. If we delay the patches until >> after 'staging' and 'python-updates' as well, no merge will be >> necessary. But it won't be a pretty cherry-pick either, by then. > > True, we should not wait *too* long. I think that doing it after > core-updates and before staging and python-updates could be good > compromise, because those branches touch a relatively small number of > modules. WDYT? I think the least painful path is: * Merge 'core-updates'. * Merge to 'staging'. * * Branch 'python-updates' from staging. * Build staging. Sounds good? :-) >> I don't really have a strong opinion either way. But I'd hate to the one >> resolving potentially 100s of merge conflicts at once ;-) Cherry-picking >> at least restricts the set of conflicts to these changes. > > OTOH, if Kei doesn't have an unsquashed version of this patch, it will > be annoying to split it up :) Yeah. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEu7At3yzq9qgNHeZDoqBt8qM6VPoFAlmCWBUACgkQoqBt8qM6 VPpWQAgAoTDcY3ShHoN7RuhNz+HFv6zrWo/UlDdU4FhrbHq/RMt3jUWbPOtJhCTg RTAaPOFEtaRkwpvm+seMmpPOOxbsCONDZ1Id3BXB/otXXWYcB9GA7rMCrNOPqbu+ 6BtF8DPT0at9PHd/2afBNMSmWj1uVwteGSwi34PtxNvW3WV5w4SWp7NITOEDPukt c9+ujdIuaQgsZHhmXxIkhzfkwjMCBoRYCAwqV48oHjtOig15k/oyGbqBL1SZ3p2D yWpySyGH2Amw4YCKZsQQffqOCVISIfncRZwP57tai1x3gNuvyI+73NBojKhyFemp cGQiyg/F4CAIiWVfVO6MXsDhCWvnxw== =NrMo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--