From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: fontforge: Update to 20160404. Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 23:26:08 +0200 Message-ID: <87h9f5cia7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160407223938.1c517e1e@openmailbox.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]:49220) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aqSIg-0004yU-Vr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 17:26:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aqSId-0006r1-0W for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 17:26:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?Q?=22al=C3=ADrio?= eyng"'s message of "Fri, 8 Apr 2016 04:50:50 +0000") 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: =?utf-8?Q?al=C3=ADrio?= eyng Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org al=C3=ADrio eyng skribis: > On 4/8/16, Eric Bavier wrote: >> Does >> FONTFORGE_VERSIONDATE not need to be updated? > this marks the time when fontforge builds became reproducible in guix. > otherwise it's pretty arbitrary. > ludo, wdyt? I agree, it=E2=80=99s arbitrary and not very informative anyway. Ludo=E2=80=99.