Hey Eric, Thank you for all the review-work!
On 2015-10-22 at 05:10, quoth ericbav...@openmailbox.org: > I apologize in advance that so many of these comments pertain to the synopses > and descriptions, but I find that aspect of packaging important, and Ludo was > kind enough to write up the "Synopses and Descriptions" section in guix.info. I guess that's the way it should be. I admit that my descriptions are often shoddy simply because i wasn't sure what the library does. But of course that's no excuse to not follow the style (e.g., sentence fragments, formatting). > Along the way I gave up trying to analyse and comment on inputs vs > propagated-inputs. The builds check out, and we can adjust later if needed. Right. I tried to be conservative with propagated-inputs, but at least they all work... I'm curious to see how the library search path patch will influence things. > In the absense of comments on a patch, assume a "LGTM!" :) Okay, well, i'll deal with all the comments before merging anything. > Thank you, Paul for all the effort, Seems you went to a lot of effort too, thank you for your thorough reviews! On to a more Haskell-friendly Guix! :) Cheers, p.
