>jeu. 20 févr. 2025 at 15:42, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Yes, please send a patch for the etc/teams.scm addition, and I'll commit
> it. You can add my name to the electronics already.
See #76437.
I have included the four modules I consider relevant to that matter,
feel free to complete if I for
Hi Cayetano,
[...]
>> In other words, I'd keep what we have but introduce an electronics-team
>> with a scope that covers them.
>
> How do we proceed with this ? Do we send a patch for the new (binary)
> team ? Anyone else interested ?
Yes, please send a patch for the etc/teams.scm addition, an
>lun. 17 févr. 2025 at 21:03, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
> Hi Cayetano,
>
> Andreas Enge writes:
>
>> Am Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 10:11:17AM +0100 schrieb Cayetano Santos:
>>> Two options at this point: we keep on happily dropping loosely related
>>> packages somewhere (is that a problem, after all ?);
Hi Cayetano,
Andreas Enge writes:
> Am Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 10:11:17AM +0100 schrieb Cayetano Santos:
>> Two options at this point: we keep on happily dropping loosely related
>> packages somewhere (is that a problem, after all ?); or we create a new
>> team (if there is interest on participatin
Am Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 10:11:17AM +0100 schrieb Cayetano Santos:
> Two options at this point: we keep on happily dropping loosely related
> packages somewhere (is that a problem, after all ?); or we create a new
> team (if there is interest on participating) to organise and maintain
> these packag
>sam. 08 févr. 2025 at 21:14, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> However, confused: we already have (gnu packages electronics). Why not simply
> move any
> misclassified packages between the two modules?
In my mind, I was thinking about merging fpga and electronics, sorry.
> Is the implication th
Hi,
I *think* a renaming patch would just show up as a massive diff that will
conflict with other minor changes. In that case it's better to keep the
discussion ‘conceptual’ until the very end.
However, confused: we already have (gnu packages electronics). Why not simply
move any misclassifi
Hi Cayetano,
If you think renaming the module is justified, feel free to submit a
patch addressing your concern, along with a rationale like the one in
your email. Someone with commit access may or may not accept it
eventually.
(FYI I don't have a commit access.)
Cheers,
Bost
Le sam. 8 févr. 202
Hi Guix,
I need to point out a (not that relevant after all) issue which
bothers me a bit, regarding the gnu/package/fpga.scm module. Simply
put, it doesn’t necessarily concern fpga related software, and so its
name may be misleading. Electronics would be a much better choice: I
ignore
