Hi! Lars-Dominik Braun <l...@6xq.net> skribis:
>> My understanding is that most of them require manual intervention—i.e., >> one has to tweak what ‘guix import’ produces, even if we ignore >> synopsis/description/license, to set the right inputs, etc. If we were >> to estimate the fraction of imported packages for which manual changes >> are needed, what would it look like? >> >> importer fraction of imported packages needing changes >> pypi 50% (some miss source distro, “sdist”; some have >> non-Python deps) > that seems right, although the most common modification I do nowadays > is replacing 'check with a pytest phase. Right. PyPI/setup.py/.whl doesn’t contain info as to how to run tests, right? >> hackage ? >> stackage (Lars?) > I’ve mostly used the updater, not the importer, so I can’t say a > number unfortunately. Did the updater suggest input changes? >> cran 5% (Ricardo? Simon? seems to almost always work?) > In my experience the number of interventions here goes towards zero > actually, except for description. It’s pretty good :) Yay! >> npm (WIP) (Jelle? Timothy?) > Maybe 5%? But the imported packages do not build anything and don’t > run tests either, so chances for failure are pretty low. Yeah. > Would it be possible to just run the importer again for existing packages > and compare the result (minus synopsis/description) with what’s > available in Guix? That should give you much more accurate numbers than > our guesswork. That’s a good idea. I can try and do that on a sample of packages. Thanks! Ludo’.
