From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor_Boskovits?= Subject: Re: Blog: Guix packaging tutorial Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 11:37:11 +0200 Message-ID: References: <878t38t5gz.fsf@jnanam.net> <87muro9gz1.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <875zyct26s.fsf@jnanam.net> <87va6a9nt9.fsf@gnu.org> <87k1mp1cvz.fsf@jnanam.net> 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]:55716) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAXPQ-0004ei-22 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 05:37:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gAXPN-00078G-V1 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 05:37:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87k1mp1cvz.fsf@jnanam.net> 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: slade@jnanam.net Cc: Guix-devel , guix-blog@gnu.org Benjamin Slade ezt =C3=ADrta (id=C5=91pont: 2018. okt. 1= 1., Cs, 3:38): > > Hi Ludo', > > So for me, the list at > > seems more like a list of `desired output conditions' and the numbering > doesn't really correspond directly to the temporal ordering of steps > (with some of the numbered items probably being temporally independent > but perhaps some not, which is somewhat confusing). For instance, > references to documentation (gender-neutral pronouns) occur lower in the > list than linting, and so if one tried to follow the checklist > temporally, one could end up doing things which invalidated the > linting. Should formatting occur before or after linting? Or is it > irrelevant? Not answering all your questions, but formatting should come before linting= . I suggest linting to be done when there are no more changes. > > For another instance, actually producing the patch (via `git > format-patch') is mentioned in the `preamble' but is not part of the > list (where reasonably it might occur near the end). And then there are > other things which are like steps (the actual sending of the patch) > which occur below the checklist. > > It might make sense if there were: > > A. a list of temporally-ordered steps for creating and submitting a packa= ge > - where one of big steps could refer to Pierre's build tutorial > - and where another step could refer to a list of things to check (B) > > B. a non-temporal list of things to check before submitting > (e.g. using gender-neutral pronouns in documentation isn't really a > step, but a `desired output' condition) > > =E2=80=94Ben > > > On 2018-10-10T03:02:42-0600, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > > > Hi Benjamin, > > > Benjamin Slade skribis: > > > > ...But I was thinking about something a bit like Pjotr's list, thoug= h > > > with a bit more detail. (E.g. things like using `git format-patch' t= o > > > create patches for submission.) > > > Does the list at > > > > corresponds to what you=E2=80=99re looking for? > > > If not, we should probably change it (see doc/guix.texi in the repo.) > > > Thanks, > > Ludo=E2=80=99. > > > -- > Benjamin Slade - https://babbagefiles.xyz > `(pgp_fp: ,(21BA 2AE1 28F6 DF36 110A 0E9C A320 BBE8 2B52 EE19)) > '(sent by mu4e on Emacs running under GNU/Linux . https://gnu.org ) > `(Choose Linux ,(Choose Freedom) . https://linux.com ) >