Hello David, david.lars...@selfhosted.xyz skribis:
> This is my first contribution to guix and it's just a minor fix for > the guile-bash package which had an outdated source url. I was able to > retrieve the same revision of the package via the software-heritage > project's website and upload it to gitlab. Then I installed it > successfully via guix package -f my-guile-bash.scm using the gitlab > url, then copied it to the existing guile-xyz.scm in gnu/packages. [...] > --- a/gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm > +++ b/gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm > @@ -294,23 +294,21 @@ dictionary and suggesting spelling corrections.") > (license license:gpl3+))) > > (define-public guile-bash > - ;; This project is currently retired. It was initially announced here: > - ;; <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2015-02/msg00003.html>. > - (let ((commit "1eabc563ca5692b3e08d84f1f0e6fd2283284469") > + (let ((commit "49099fe6a592aa3b8001e826b939869fe5811785") > (revision "0")) Why is the commit different? Looks like it’s more than just a mirror. If you made changes on top of the original code, that’s actually great. However, I’d prefer to first see a patch that simply changes the URL, not the commit and hash, and later updates to a different revision. Does that make sense? Andreas Enge <andr...@enge.fr> skribis: > should the package not be retrieved automatically from Software Heritage > with the newest Guix API? And apart from that, will it be desirable to keep > around an unmaintained software for which the source has disappeared? I think David is in fact suggesting that they may well be maintaining it, which is good news IMO. :-) Thanks, Ludo’.
