From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: core-updates merged! Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:37:09 +0100 Message-ID: <877g7gx9ru.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87mwgn8twp.fsf@gnu.org> <87txal0xpq.fsf@gnu.org> <87y4zxym1r.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55179) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WT6kR-0001mS-CW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:37:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WT6kJ-0002HK-TA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:37:19 -0400 Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:49463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WT6kJ-0002HD-M3 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:37:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: (David Thompson's message of "Wed, 26 Mar 2014 13:28:02 -0400") 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: "Thompson, David" Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org "Thompson, David" skribis: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wro= te: >> "Thompson, David" skribis: >> >>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s w= rote: >>>> I've just merged core-updates in master, and Hydra has already built >>>> most of it. So that brings glibc 2.19, grep 2.18, libgc 7.4, guile >>>> 2.0.11, bash 6.3, the ability to use directories as package sources >>>> (instead of tarballs), and a bunch of other updates and improvements. >>> >>> bash 6.3? Is this a typo or have I missed something? >> >> 4.3, indeed. :-) > > I didn't realize that bash had made a release last month. Did we > influence this release? I remember reading about the pile of patches > for 4.2. I=E2=80=99m not sure we have this much influence yet. ;-) >>> Merging core-updates every 2 months sounds reasonable to me, fwiw. >>> What are the potential downsides to frequently merging core-updates? >>> Too much package rebuilding? Unstable software? Just curious if >>> there are any good reasons for a more conservative approach. >> >> The main issue is too much rebuilding, yes, and perhaps sometimes we'd >> gather very few changes in 2 months. >> >> Ludo'. > > Could we skip a merge cycle if there haven't been many changes or > would that be too inconsistent? Well yeah, we=E2=80=99ll see how it goes and adjust the process. But we fi= rst need to actually follow the process to get some hindsight. :-) Ludo=E2=80=99.