Ryan Prior schreef op za 19-03-2022 om 00:08 [+0000]: > Would it be feasible or desirable to create a set of "reason" > symbols, similar to our "licenses," and attach a reason (or unknown?) > to each snippet and patch? Then we can expose meaningful data to the > end-user about patches & snippets that are available, enabling an > informed choice about whether to apply them when fetching sources. > > This could also be useful in our own record-keeping, so that we can > track the usage of patches and snippets for different reasons. It > would be nice, for example, to see a downward trend in the number of > patches for build systems that won't work at all without them, either > because we improve the logic in our build steps or because we > contribute changes upstream to make software easier to build.
FWIW, when reviewing, I try to make sure that the reason is documented
in a comment:
(origin
(snippet
#~(begin
;; Remove bundled libraries
(delete-file-recursively "vendor")
;; Remove non-free extension
(delete-file-recursively "foobar"))))
Additionally, patch files should contain a description what they are
for and a link to the upstream record.
So in theory, what you are describing is already being done, except it
is done as comments and not some machine-readable tagging system.
Greetings,
Maxime.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
