On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:52:15PM +0200, Cyril Roelandt wrote: > On 03/21/2016 04:48 PM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote: > > To automate the repetitive tasks, Cyril Roelandt had started sometimes > > ago to work on a bot that was continuously applying and building > > incoming patches on top of master and report (by email) if things were > > building correctly. I think that is a good idea that could be extended > > by providing a way to send commands to the bot like what is done for > > Debbugs. > > Yeah, it was a fun experiment. The main issue is that reading mail is > harder than it looks. People attach patches to their mails, they send > them using git-send-email, they attach the output of "git format-patch" > to a regular mail, they have weird encodings, etc. That means there are > lots of cases to tests, and lots of potential bugs. If the "patches" > tool from QEMU does that well already, I'd be in favor of not recoding it :) > > That being said, something we really need is a tool that helps us handle > trivial update patches (basically, patches that just update the version > and the hash of a given package). It should apply the patch and run a > script like this one: > > $ cat check-update.sh > make || exit 1 > for pkg in $(./pre-inst-env guix refresh -l $1 | sed 's/.*: //') > do > echo "[+] Rebuilding $pkg" > ./pre-inst-env guix build $pkg > if [ "$?" -ne "0" ]; then > echo "[+] Rebuilding $pkg: KO" > exit 1 > else > echo "[+] Rebuilding $pkg: OK" > fi > done
It'd be best to have it check against hydra also, so we would know to "not care" if a package that failed to build previously still fails to build. > > I think we could have a mailing-list dedicated to these trivial update > patches. I'd also be in favor of splitting the mailing-list into many > smaller ones, such as: > - core; > - packages; > - trivial updates. > > WDYT? > > Cyril. > I think it really comes down to if we've outgrown GNU's mailing-lists. We have guix-devel, bugs-guix and help-guix (and guix-commits). As an interm suggestion we might do better with tagging the subject line with what it is. The gnunet patches were much easier to find with the [PATCH] tag. -- Efraim Flashner <efr...@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
