From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Releasing 0.9.1 Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:48:12 +0100 Message-ID: <877figwusz.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87d1sbi827.fsf@gnu.org> <56B734FB.7000709@uq.edu.au> 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]:39820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSOlQ-0007gP-Dx for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 07:48:29 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSOlP-0000ns-Ig for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 07:48:28 -0500 In-reply-to: <56B734FB.7000709@uq.edu.au> 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: Ben Woodcroft Cc: Guix-devel Ben Woodcroft writes: > On 05/02/16 23:46, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > [..] >> • Possibly the GitHub updater, which seemed pretty much ready. Ben? > Revisiting your comments on that patch Ludo the only thing that stands > out is: > > >[Ricardo] proposed recently to pass a package object instead of a > package name to ‘latest-release’. We should do that ideally before this > patch goes in, or otherwise soon. > > Is there any update for this Ricardo? Do we just go ahead and use the > old style for the time being? Oh, I dropped the ball there. It’s very simple to do this, but I don’t think I can do it today, I’m afraid. I can try to do it tomorrow, but I don’t think it should block the GitHub updater. I could easily patch the GitHub updater along with all the other updaters that would need to be adapted, so my vote is for using the old style for now and switching to package objects soon thereafter. ~~ Ricardo