Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

[Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1446 bytes --]

On 2022-01-18, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Timothy Sample <samplet@ngyro.com> skribis:
>> A really important thing to do at this point is to verify that some
>> reasonable looking computation is covered by what we are doing already.
>> For instance, is every source used to build Guile (or Python or R)
>> preserved?  This will ensure that key sources are not missing, which is
>> a real possibility given that everything so far has been purely a
>> numbers game!
>
> I wonder if we could have something similar to ‘guix weather -c’, which
> would highlight missing sources with many dependents.
>
> TeX Live is a big concern: it’s all Subversion, and everything depends
> on those packages.  IIRC, SWH does not support Subversion yet; and when
> it does, we’ll have to adjust our code so it can actually fetch
> Subversion checkouts from SWH.  One issue is partial checkouts: all
> these ‘texlive-’ packages refer to partial checkouts of the big TeX Live
> repo.

Maintain a git mirror of texlive SVN using git-svn or similar, and have
guix packages use that, and make sure SWH ingests it? Is it difficult
because of the size of TeX Live?

A little ugly, sure, but maybe only include the revisions that guix is
interested in for starters...

It has been some years ago that I used git-svn, but it worked well for a
several year transition for me and a small number of projects...


live well,
  vagrant

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]