On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:13:32PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis:
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 02:38:26PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> >> Given that core-updates with Guile 2.0.12 is on its way and that master
> >> is still at 2.0.11, I’d suggest to leave master as-is and focus on
> >> core-updates.
> >> There we have 2 options:
> >> 1. Changing ‘guile-2.0/fixed’ to 2.0.13, but 1,310 packages depend on it.
> >> 2. Grafting 2.0.13, which is doable since 2.0.12 and .13 have the same
> >> ABI.
> > Considering that 2.0.13 fixes a bug that is exposed by grafting,
> That *was* exposed by grafting; commit
> d72267863382041b84a9712eea354882be72ef55 works around the problem, so
> that’s fine.
> > We could always un-graft it between releases if Hydra isn't busy.
> Yeah. I was thinking that we’d want to finish this core-updates cycle
> and then later do an ungrafting round or something.
That sounds good. I think we should try doing some more specific
"updates" branches in between releases, assuming we have the compute
power and the motivation.
And we could also have some periodic ungrafting rebuilds when necessary
So, we would graft guile-2.0, make guile-2.0/fixed use 2.0.12, and set
replacement #f in guile-next? Anything else?