From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Debbugs handling of packages Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 15:29:31 +0100 Message-ID: <8760kkbvsk.fsf@elephly.net> References: <20170206190923.GA3592@mail.thebird.nl> <87shnplrjh.fsf@elephly.net> <87r338pzgk.fsf_-_@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53677) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbTFi-000791-20 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 09:29:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbTFg-0006V4-Pn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 09:29:46 -0500 In-reply-to: <87r338pzgk.fsf_-_@gnu.org> 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" To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Ludovic Courtès writes: >> This was discussed before at >> >> and we could request a separate Debbugs instance for >> “guix-packages@gnu.org” *right now* if we wanted to. >> >> What do other people think about this? > > I think we should just go ahead and setup that Debbugs instance like I > said I’d do back in September. It can only be an improvement over what > we have now anyway. > > Objections? No objections, please go ahead! Just a question: does this mean that patch *sets* should be flattened before sending them so that they are part of the *same* debbugs issue (instead of being scattered across as many issues as there are patches)? E.g. for submitting the last 10 commits: git format-patch -10 --stdout > series.patch git send-email --to=guix-packages@gnu.org series.patch I guess we can play with this once we have the debbugs instance. -- Ricardo GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC https://elephly.net