Re: Let’s freeze and build ‘core-updates’!

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hey Marius,

Marius Bakke <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Hello Guix!
>>
>> Since I’m about to leave keyboard for a couple of weeks, here’s a to-do
>> list for those of you who’ll be around.  :-)
>>
>> The last things I wanted to push for ‘core-updates’ were a reproducible
>> Guile (done in b5efd14a9add1bcb4a44fa5b9c1b47706f3df9da), and a subset
>> or all of the aarch64 patches, depending on their status (should not be
>> a blocker IMO).
>>
>> So, here’s a plan:
>>
>>   • Once Efraim has pushed some of the aarch64 patches, do another
>>     evaluation of the “core” package set for that branch, and check for
>>     anything wrong.  From there on, forbid full-rebuild changes.
>>
>>   • Once the “core” subset builds correctly on all the supported
>>     platforms (those that Hydra supports), merge ‘master’.  Maybe update
>>     a couple of things like GnuTLS while we’re at it.  From there on
>>     forbid non-trivial changes.
>>
>>   • Build all the packages.  (To do that, someone with access to Hydra
>>     must change the “subset” argument to “all” in the config of the
>>     ‘core-updates’ jobset.)
>>
>>   • Fix things.
>>
>>   • Once most regressions have been addressed and most binaries are
>>     available, merge ‘core-updates’ into ‘master’.
>>
>> How does that sound?
>
> This sounds great. I have a question:
>
> The 'staging' branch contains a number of minor updates and it's been
> more than a month since the last merge. Should we do a staging
> evaluation first (i.e. next few days), or just merge it to core-updates?

Good point.  I’d just merge it into ‘core-updates’ at this point.

Ludo’.