From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51380) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1imRLr-0003WE-L6 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 18:55:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1imRLq-0000et-FE for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 18:55:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57587) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1imRLq-0000di-Az for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 18:55:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1imRLq-0007Cx-A5 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 18:55:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#38827] [PATCH] gnu: Add gitlab-runner. Resent-Message-ID: From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <20191231091757.69869-1-r.majd@pantherx.org> <87imlwsqir.fsf@gmail.com> <87d0c4sjam.fsf@gmail.com> <87tv5ga341.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:54:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87tv5ga341.fsf@gmail.com> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:09:34 +0100") Message-ID: <878smsxd8i.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: Mathieu Othacehe Cc: 38827@debbugs.gnu.org, Reza Alizadeh Majd Hello! Mathieu Othacehe skribis: >> I update the package definition following the above guidelines. >> could you please check if this updated patch is acceptable? > > I fixed the indentation, added one space between the two description > sentences and pushed. The =E2=80=98vendor=E2=80=99 directory contains a large number of bundled d= ependencies, including various bits of Docker and Kubernetes. I=E2=80=99m not comfortab= le keeping this package as is. Reza, could you look into unbundling these, or at least a significant part of these? There=E2=80=99s a Go importer at , but it=E2=80=99s for =E2=80=98Gopkg.toml=E2=80=99 files, which seem to be o= ut of fashion, so I=E2=80=99m not sure it=E2=80=99d be useful. In the meantime, I=E2=80=99d be in favor of reverting the patch. WDYT? Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.