On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 08:13:12PM +0300, Efraim Flashner wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:11:38PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > > > More generally, we could try to have a “staging” branch for safe changes > > that involve a rebuild of between ~300 and ~1200 packages, that we’d > > merge more frequently than ‘core-updates’ (I think the Nix folks do > > that). By “safe” I mean things like ungrafting, minor upgrades and > > improvements; the goal would be to reduce the latency for such changes. > > > > Things that rebuild more than ~1200 packages would still go to > > ‘core-updates’. > > > > WDYT? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Ludo’. > > > > This sounds like a good idea in general. A quick `guix refresh -l cmake' > showed ~1100 packages, which would make this a good spot for the patch I > tossed into core-updates to also build the ccmake binary.
+1 > Currently I think most of us try to keep the number of rebuilds under > ~150, so it might be nice to have some sort of guidelines in a separate > post (and in HACKING eventually) so that people don't miss it.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
