Marius Bakke <mba...@fastmail.com> writes: > Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> writes: > >> Marius Bakke <mba...@fastmail.com> writes: >> >>> The official vim mirrors only carries major versions and individual >>> patches, no up-to-date releases. This patch changes the source uri to >>> the tagged github releases instead of downloading all 40+ (so far) >>> patches individually. >>> >>> I'm not very happy about changing to a third-party source, but IMO it >>> beats keeping track of the frequent patches. WDYT? >> >> I’m also not happy about using a third-party mirror for vim. Can we be >> sure that this is updated consistently and in time? (Is this done >> automatically?) > > When I sent this, the 0047 release was about an hour old and the > corresponding patch was not yet available on ftp.vim.org. So it seems > to be the other way around. The "vim" organization on Github is endorsed > on vim.org and maintained by Bram Molenaar himself.
Ah, cool. This makes all the difference, IMO. >> Guix can handle downloading patches, so there’s really no need for >> switching in my opinion. “gnu/packages/bash.scm” could be used as a >> reference for how to deal with a large number of patches. > > vim-7.4 ended at 2367 patches[0]. 8.0 is currently at 51 (four since > yesterday!), whereas bash has 42, so they are not really comparable. I > think vim would rarely be updated, if it required downloading and > creating potentially hundreds of patch references at once. > > They are also not signed, though we could rely on the MD5SUMS file. > > With this information, do you still think a custom patch importer is > better? I don't really mind either way, but someone needs to make it :) No, you convinced me :) Thanks for your patience! ~~ Ricardo
