From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38447) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2MyA-0008FD-Ip for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:47:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2My6-0002uZ-RI for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:47:06 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:54047) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e2My6-0002uV-O8 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:47:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e2My6-00062h-Gg for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:47:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#28739] [PATCH 0/5] Update python{,2}-a* Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <20171008043545.9511-1-tipecaml@gmail.com> <20171009192223.GC16949@jasmine.lan> <18bba7d8-4ae6-4005-56b3-f398440312ac@gmail.com> <20171009195319.GB22410@jasmine.lan> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 21:45:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20171009195319.GB22410@jasmine.lan> (Leo Famulari's message of "Mon, 9 Oct 2017 15:53:19 -0400") Message-ID: <87wp41a2of.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: Leo Famulari Cc: 28739@debbugs.gnu.org Leo Famulari skribis: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 09:49:13PM +0200, Cyril Roelandt wrote: >> Hehe. So, to give a bit more context: I'm trying to write an updated >> version of my Guix backend for tox (the Python virtual environment >> manager). One of the issues I have when trying it on real-world projects >> is that our Python libraries are a bit outdated. > > Yeah, I'm glad you're working on this. > >> If it's OK with everybody, I'd like to push the simplest patches (those >> that only change the version and the hash) without going through a >> review first. WDYT? > > Sure, I think it's fine. Definitely. Just make sure to run your script that rebuilds dependents before pushing, to be on the safe side. Thanks for working on it! Ludo=E2=80=99.