From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id WHveAjPlVGFhEwAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:14:11 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id GBMsOjLlVGE8BAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 22:14:10 +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 8D78D13989 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:14:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:40806 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mVhq5-0004nQ-Pb for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:14:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42980) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mVhpy-0004nI-3R for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:14:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39007) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mVhpx-0004gS-PO for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:14:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mVhpx-0000PK-LB for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:14:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#50620] [PATCH 1/2] guix: packages: Document 'computed-origin-method'. Resent-From: Liliana Marie Prikler Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 22:14:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50620 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: zimoun Cc: Mark H Weaver , 50620@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 50620-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B50620.16329536391551 (code B ref 50620); Wed, 29 Sep 2021 22:14:01 +0000 Received: (at 50620) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Sep 2021 22:13:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50553 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mVhpu-0000Ow-S3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:13:59 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:38872) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mVhpr-0000Og-NR for 50620@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 18:13:57 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id 205-20020a1c01d6000000b0030cd17ffcf8so6536785wmb.3 for <50620@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:13:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vQgL8nnBg9X6KnJk0WacwZelrTG5OehIFCX+EVOUfOI=; b=mdTATOzYZt8C4yJ/nxCEuUganp7E53goG8bLdVcdZhl2DEDHzdxoYLzYmRgN9VLW1o BTDEscM2ugk/Y/+Btygow5wdY4MVoPl6yVGygE0jWl8GFW4i/jDcL319TroNmZhCwZzp 1frYnOGabbAJzZyDVvdgjZ/bDJgRMelSbGRXq9DQ0v7c5Ne61+vFGmuTT1vKHG34Idqy nf5sn+NcK10F9pc6UXKDumsLt3H3PyK7Lg5GxMeuvhGGwW6IrbPBvGsMs18LldS9G9Iy dCiv5RK5nyZXaxd33xwtpM/GQ3VHnhIA3cORCw7f+8xGuj5031SP2zJ1N4zboHDD13p5 y79Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=vQgL8nnBg9X6KnJk0WacwZelrTG5OehIFCX+EVOUfOI=; b=n/k9kqJZqfLEvhJkSn0gbSTI2z1x420/IQPlLuUNEVDdIODr+nTUjnc3dI/KP7+yiU l7PuoX2HxoEY17ozmuALNy96yCGPmfYo/ZkuNOguRFyyrDzYEcay51jhFoctisrCzl7k xdBwS03yFB05Ntu3zNShVlpAb2YrtgJAs0UZ/IHbNBEyq0rMJ6RkNP/HY3h33JYdriU4 1gN1qpEBnJ1pqQ7vfQLJ52WDmVt19gl4fGIClm+EvWq08Xrs/NX8I+rCrA1NohQYrpIQ ZkLhrXflmChb0zalZNax0gTWy3UUGfbp1R9wsqfPYPMNHB6ruqUYJ9+XL6qAmzzHShEJ 3sdA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533BwOLzHj6fE1b83loWq5xpNhhn2jpAD9I2UYCrdLQh6hwY+YDb MpHmvqxuk2mkKp3Lc4k5MEI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxyIAM6GyDsNe3d+juCjEafE4GFXfd2+swmP4GSD6iCtIwkTyTY4PzlRwR+H/sYN5iP7PMGlQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:7508:: with SMTP id o8mr12734640wmc.104.1632953629704; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nijino.fritz.box (85-127-52-93.dsl.dynamic.surfer.at. [85.127.52.93]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l18sm1062396wrp.56.2021.09.29.15.13.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Liliana Marie Prikler Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:13:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: <861r57dtq1.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20210916114734.2686426-1-zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> <9b6ee27ff10e1042a5d61d0f93d957cf760e9ecb.camel@gmail.com> <87v930ay5y.fsf@netris.org> <87pmstghx0.fsf@netris.org> <1803ff0456849f456c6994d47cbe50d1a8ff6a09.camel@gmail.com> <56dcce10a751153d89f515028cd18c9125f6b84f.camel@gmail.com> <756ae01852047a7adc2522c025c8cd7283dc7e55.camel@gmail.com> <861r57dtq1.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1632953650; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=vQgL8nnBg9X6KnJk0WacwZelrTG5OehIFCX+EVOUfOI=; b=rbQbH+HzmIXU51n5zRRWX3/ooCh6tj9R2T8sDsAnNHDPgyaN06N7ZxSPqZnIZHySxo5rlB qtw4gVGTxI8CCXvMnCOKafARcBUJhLw7KiVUtm6JbL+mJaBbXAtaHLOcfzOlMLR0DcvqfU WUUqaK/SFtp+L+dNpbijsppye6zYz4HM01/iHJajb9EI/3CEX2UcGG9Unl7UJ7hQLRnRAI lTBble8dLGjN3t2yXTXIjQdWWxfCEdj3BjMDs5H5jrcdxlfTMSnZSYHg1Eoe9QqA+95EPJ tOEhoezlavHdJNRwG0vqIEtE+5rZzyyXn8Ulu54zYlns2JK9OdiJxD9fsqWCPg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1632953650; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=bPzcsB7LLhp5REjaPm26QH1gyu/R9pKr82tRWJYEo5aJXWIvxqZa3s2igDpKONUmUB1TKo XC9UmoLXPG/m4ClE3vRfp32F4TydlE7ORg/WsmgzJq16joJ0Qr3srsPsN4DvHTC+V7gODn EoctTn8jr2CoKJLnYahz6xErK9d8RpmHE8moIfjzCjXq+++pWk4p8UoWvmeH/ErtLKeYae VKNNA4cSy+6FS5GMkROMcc6VlKDD914MZ4f2GjP7a2noVy0SyA6WftVlLbCuoTHAwfU6Bk HZBswaH6WXLcma5NZwi61jJmoFVyCMgKGFERbiQrtn+P3g5WjYo1RCuKFEvMJw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=mdTATOzY; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.30 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=mdTATOzY; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 8D78D13989 X-Spam-Score: -1.30 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: nZ4k1NUNCrae Hi zimoun, Am Mittwoch, den 29.09.2021, 22:15 +0200 schrieb zimoun: > Hi Liliana, > > On Wed, 29 Sep 2021 at 21:10, Liliana Marie Prikler < > liliana.prikler@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I could roll my own channel with the exact same computed-origin- > > method copypasta'd once more and it wouldn't be detected, though > > that's probably off-topic.[1] > > If it is in your own channel, then it will not be part of the file > https://guix.gnu.org/sources.json. > > From my understanding, you are arguing about corner cases that does > not happen now. And if it happens in the near future, we will fix > it, depending on what will really happen in this very future. ;-) The patch mentions "automatic detection of computed-origin-method" which I would assume has implication beyond this sources.json. But yeah, I can see that it's off-topic to this discussion, hence why I wrote that it's probably off-topic to this dicussion. > > > *refactorize: I think (guix packages) is better because it > > > defines > > [...] > > > > half-mentioned this rationale. > > > > To that I would counter, that (guix packages) only defines package > > and > > [...] > > > issue referencing the GNU namespace to get to it. > > I hear your argument. Well, I will not discuss it. Raise as an > answer to Ludo, maybe. I did already mention that in my reply to Ludo, so we'll see. > > > To be honest, I thought that this tiny improvement of the SWH > > > coverage would have been much more easier and that that trivial > > > task > > > would not have taken more than 15 days with lengthy discussions. > > > :-) > > > > To be honest, part of the lengthy discussion was me being confused > > about your intent – in multiple ways. If you wanted a "quick and > > dirty fix" you could have went with checking those two modules > > explicitly on the guix-artwork side and it would have had a fairly > > small impact. > > Reading this patch first and the discussion second, I had assumed > > your intent was rather to formalize a method that had hitherto only > > been used informally and the move to the guix namespace amplifies > > that imo. > > The cover letter [1] says: «This patch follows the discussion from > [0].» where [0] points to the Mark’s approval as an answer to a patch > which applies to website/apps/packages/builder.scm. > > Then the cover letter [1] says: «In short, it simplifies the code > generating the file 'sources.json' used by Software Heritage to > ingest all the tarballs.» > > 1: > > I am sorry if this cover letter was not enough explicit about my > intent. From my point of view, the aim of this cover letter was to > invite to read first the discussion and second read the patch. My > bad if this aim had been missed. I apologize for the confusion. Again, I read the patch itself first and the context second, but speaking about "simplifying the code generating sources.json", the real change were we to compare (2) and (3) or (3a) to each other would be a 3 line diff (two deletions, one insertion). So I do think it is fair to also talk about implications beyond those three lines. Also, even with this context in mind, the patch at first appeared to me as a way of sneaking (1) past the radar, rather than the three-line diff that one would see when looking at it from 50515 with (2) applied. > Being optimistic, this discussion leads to some concerns about this > ’computed-origin-method’ and ideas for improving. IMHO, it is worth > to open another issue providing the wish of multi-origin packages and > reference to this. WDYT? Since it's but an idea sketch in my head at the moment, I think the best we could muster discussing this outside of this thread would be on guix-devel. Which is fine and all, but since we're looking in this thread for something comparatively small in scale I'd say let's look at the small issue first and the big issue once we've fixed the small one. Let's shortly recap what options we have. A: Push a v2 of 50515 guix-artwork, which references (gnu packages linux) and (gnu packages gnuzilla) using @@. Then decide on which module we want to have computed-origin-method to be in and update the guix package. Finally, update the sources.json generator to use the singular reference. B: Push the lazy v2 as above, but instead hold up the cleaning up part until we find a solution for the computed-origin-method in this thread or guix-devel. C: Discuss the (gnu packages) vs. (guix packages) thing some more, merge this patch (with perhaps a move), update the guix package and then do a v2 of 50515. C2: Have Ludo flip a coin and decide. D: Have computed-origin-method block the sources.json generator until it is completely resolved. We obviously want to avoid D here and are somewhat aiming for C at the moment instead. However, we are kinda stuck here as even though we don't want this situation to continue indefinitely, we can't seem to reach a consensus quickly. WDYT? Does it make sense to do the "redundant test" [1], knowing that it'll be soon simplified? Can we hold off more computed-origin-method clones until we find a way of making do without it or actually decide that it's public API? All the best, Liliana [1]