On Fri, Jul 04, 2025 at 12:27:10AM +0800, Hilton Chain wrote:
> Hi Guix,
>
> In our manual, we link to the "ChangeLog" style[1], but in practice a
> different
> convention is used.
>
> Considering the following change (91bbed89b52eb64ee2388bf58be44eb5ae6a9dbb,
> found this when searching ‘if’ in the guix package):
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> modified gnu/packages/package-management.scm
> @@ -239,6 +239,12 @@ (define-public guix
> $(prefix)/etc/openrc\n")))
>
> (invoke "sh" "bootstrap")))
> + ,@(if (target-riscv64?)
> + `((add-after 'unpack
> 'use-correct-guile-version-for-tests
> + (lambda _
> + (substitute* "tests/gexp.scm"
> + (("2\\.0") "3.0")))))
> + '())
> (add-before 'build 'use-host-compressors
> (lambda* (#:key inputs target #:allow-other-keys)
> (when target
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> This is what we use:
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> * gnu/packages/package-management.scm (guix)[arguments]: Add phase when
> building for riscv64-linux to adjust the test suite.
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
>
> But according to GNU Coding Standards, the following might be used instead:
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> * gnu/packages/package-management.scm (guix) <#:phases> [(target-riscv64?)]:
> Use
> correct Guile version for tests.
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> convention:
> - * changed file
> - () changed function or variable
> - [] conditional change
> - <> indicating the part changed
>
> [] is added after <> because the condition happens within that part.
>
> Should this documented convention be followed instead, or we documenting the
> one
> currently used?
>
> Thanks
>
> [1]: https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Change-Logs.htmlHey, that commit looks familiar! :) I admit that I have never read the GNU Coding Standards closely, and for commit messages I generally try to follow what others in a project are using. Mentally my model is: section: (package|specific something): Very short description. * location/to/file: (base function/package)[subheading]: Use your words to describe the change, being specific and factual but not too verbose. (and if you feel a need to add a reason for a change, it should be a code comment). who: git author(, Co-Authored-by:) what: Add a phase ... adjust the test suite where: location/to/file: (base function/package)[subheading]: when: when building for riscv64-linux why: (If it's not clear, this should be a code comment) how: as seen in the code/diff -- 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
