From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 3jN7Hoe8Sl+2JAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 20:37:27 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id CAgXGoe8Sl9UWgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 20:37:27 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A8F69402CB for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 20:37:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:45108 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kC7bK-0000r0-5g for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 16:37:26 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39870) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kC7bB-0000qg-Dv for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 16:37:17 -0400 Received: from world.peace.net ([64.112.178.59]:54226) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kC7b9-00019r-6l for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 16:37:17 -0400 Received: from mhw by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kC7aw-0001tC-Mi; Sat, 29 Aug 2020 16:37:02 -0400 From: Mark H Weaver To: Morgan Smith Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] gnu: emacs: Update to 27.1. In-Reply-To: References: <20200819040941.32696-1-jackhill@jackhill.us> <87sgc6onvi.fsf@gnu.org> <87lfhybntk.fsf@netris.org> Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 16:35:54 -0400 Message-ID: <87h7slmbp6.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.112.178.59; envelope-from=mhw@netris.org; helo=world.peace.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/29 16:37:03 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, 42738@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: MLdroikRvNYC Hi Morgan, Morgan Smith wrote: > It seems I am taking some credit for Jack Hill's patch. I simply took > Jack's patch (labeled as patch v3 in the debbugs thread) and attempted > to build it with my personal config. Indeed, I see that now. Sorry for the mistake. I suppose it happened because it was presented to me as "the patch Morgan submitted", but it would have been better if I had taken the time to read the bug report more carefully. Also, I regret if my comments on the preliminary patch made anyone feel badly. To be clear, there's no shame in submitting an unfinished patch for review. On the contrary, it is a *very* useful contribution. In this case, it makes sense to start by updating the main 'emacs' package, and to worry about the other variants later. There's no fault in that. The only fault here lies with me. I should have looked more carefully for prior work, and I probably also pushed it prematurely. > (Also just my 2 cents, we should have upgraded emacs-next to 27.1 and > only upgraded emacs a week later. Emacs deserves more care than most > packages due to its dependence on so many other packages. Not trying to > shame anyone, just something to think of for next time.) Agreed, or perhaps 'emacs' itself should have been updated on a separate branch. In the past, when this was a smaller community and there were far fewer emacs packages in Guix, I did major updates of Emacs a few times without causing any obvious problems, but that was a different time. It's also possible that Emacs 27 was a more disruptive update than usual. Thanks very much for your comments and contributions. Best regards, Mark