John Darrington writes:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 10:39:40AM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> John Darrington writes:
>
> > We can argue about this till we're blue in the face.
> >
> > But on a pragmatic level, Mark's question demonstrates perfectly
> > that our curre
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 10:39:40AM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote:
John Darrington writes:
> We can argue about this till we're blue in the face.
>
> But on a pragmatic level, Mark's question demonstrates perfectly
> that our current system is lacking.
No it d
John Darrington writes:
> We can argue about this till we're blue in the face.
>
> But on a pragmatic level, Mark's question demonstrates perfectly
> that our current system is lacking.
No it doesn't. Our convention, taken from the GNU coding standards, is
that the rationale for non-obvious cod
We can argue about this till we're blue in the face.
But on a pragmatic level, Mark's question demonstrates perfectly
that our current system is lacking. Other projects I work on
which have a more conventional approach do not suffer from this problem.
J'
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 06:56:56AM +0100
John, Danny,
[Any exasperation is due only to the sustained level of FUD I encounter
about the Guix/GNU changelog format, and not aimed at John.]
On 20/12/16 12:03, John Darrington wrote:
> Sure (I would like to see a convention where such explanations are
> put in the commit messaage, but I hav
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 09:36:56AM +0100, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> Sure (I would like to see a convention where such explanations are
> put in the commit messaage, but I have previously been outvoted on
> that issue):
Hi Danny,
A small request: Can you please fold the text of
> Sure (I would like to see a convention where such explanations are
> put in the commit messaage, but I have previously been outvoted on
> that issue):
No, please don't put explanations into the commit message. But do put them into
the source code as a comment.
I'm also working on other project
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:03:31PM +0100, John Darrington wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:17:42AM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote:
The scheme code contains a number of procedures similar to
(load-extension "libguile-ncurses" "func"). We need the first
string to contain the absolu
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:17:42AM -0500, Mark H Weaver wrote:
Hi John,
John Darrington writes:
> * gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-ncurses) [arguments]: Install shared
object before
> attempting to build the package. Patch load-extension path before
building instead
Hi John,
John Darrington writes:
> * gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-ncurses) [arguments]: Install shared object
> before
> attempting to build the package. Patch load-extension path before building
> instead
> of after.
The first sentence above is mistaken or misleading:
"Install shared obj
John Darrington skribis:
> * gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-ncurses) [arguments]: Install shared object
> before
> attempting to build the package. Patch load-extension path before building
> instead
> of after.
OK, thank you!
Ludo’.
* gnu/packages/guile.scm (guile-ncurses) [arguments]: Install shared object
before
attempting to build the package. Patch load-extension path before building
instead
of after.
---
gnu/packages/guile.scm | 22 +-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/
12 matches
Mail list logo
