No, I don't mind at all. Thank you for helping me out.

//

On Tue, Feb 3, 2026, 12:40 Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I am fine with that incremental approach.
>
> If you don't mind, in order to make the job of the committer as easy as
> possible, I will gather your patches into a PR on codeberg.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Mathieu Lirzin
>
> Kristiyan Kanchev <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Hello,
> > Sorry for the delayed response, I'm on FOSDEM now but unfortunately, I
> won't be abe to attend Guix Days.
> > I think the best route is to merge my patches as is and then open a new
> PR on codeberg updating only the resolver.
> > I'm absolutely sure that resolver 1.6 is enough for clojure to function
> properly, but also agree with your remarks that 1.8 would be even
> > better. However, I don't think maven-resolver 1.8 is ported on Guix now,
> so this would involve some more porting and it's better to
> > tackle this in a future PR. What do you think?
> >
> > //
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 1, 2026, 20:10 Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >  Hello Kristiyan,
> >
> >  Do you agree with the rationale for making clojure-tools-deps depend on
> >  maven-resolver 1.8.2 instead of 1.6.3 ?
> >
> >  Given your understandeable dishartenment, Are you still interested in
> >  giving a second shot by opening PR on codeberg containing the updated
> >  package definition ?
> >
> >  Since dependency resolution problem is forcing me to fallback on using
> >  ‘clojure-tools-bin’ from nonguix which is frustrating, I am willing to
> >  take the burden of opening the PR and pinging people on IRC until some
> >  committer gets to merge it, if you prefer.
> >
> >  What is more comfortable to you ?
> >
> >  Mathieu
> >
> >  Ben Sturmfels <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >  > Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> writes:
> >  >
> >  >> My recommandation is similar to what Kristiyan has done. I am
> >  >> perfectly
> >  >> fine with the usage of maven-3.8-core as input to clojure-tools-deps
> >  >> package. However as you suggested I am in favour of depending on
> >  >> maven-resolver-1.8 instead of maven-resolver-1.6 because this is
> >  >> safer
> >  >> to depends on a minor version that matches what is distributed in
> >  >> the
> >  >> upstream clojure-tools bundle JAR.
> >  >
> >  > Thanks. I'm no expert in analysing JAR files, but upstream
> >  > clojure-tools does appear to be depending on maven-resolver 1.8. The
> >  > linux-install.sh fetches
> >  >
> https://github.com/clojure/brew-install/releases/download/1.12.4.1602/clojure-tools-1.12.4.1602.tar.gz
> >  > which installs the included
> >  > clojure-tools/clojure-tools-1.12.4.1602.jar. That JAR has
> >  >
> META-INF/maven/org.apache.maven.resolver/maven-resolver-api/pom.properties,
> >  > which lists:
> >  >
> >  >    artifactId=maven-resolver-api
> >  >    groupId=org.apache.maven.resolver
> >  >    version=1.8.2
> >  >
> >  > Same for the include JAR in Guix's very slightly older version
> >  > 1.12.4.1582.
> >  >
> >  > Regards,
> >  > Ben
> >  >
> >
>

Reply via email to