Re: Preservation of Guix report for 2024-01-26

Hello! Timothy Sample skribis: > I sent https://issues.guix.gnu.org/68769. Now I see that I didn’t have > the newest Git hooks installed, so no change ID and no email to the > relevant team. Sorry! (I use worktrees so the Makefile didn’t fix this > for me automatically – I should have double

Re: Preservation of Guix report for 2024-01-26

Ludovic Courtès writes: > Thumbs up on bzip2 support! We should update Disarchive in Guix but > perhaps that’s already in your pipeline? I sent https://issues.guix.gnu.org/68769. Now I see that I didn’t have the newest Git hooks installed, so no change ID and no email to the relevant team.

Re: Preservation of Guix report for 2024-01-26

Hi Timothy! Timothy Sample skribis: > The permalink is https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/2024-01-26, but you can > link to the latest report, too: https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/latest/. Yay! > New in this edition is checking for Subversion sources and > bzip2-compressed tarballs. Subversion is

Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

Hi, zimoun skribis: >> The more we make progress, the more it seems we won’t be able to avoid >> storing multiple hashes. > > Yes, it appears to me unavoidable. The question is where store such > hashes? At the origin level? At the package level via ’properties’? > Using an external service?

Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

Hi, > The more we make progress, the more it seems we won’t be able to avoid > storing multiple hashes. Yes, it appears to me unavoidable. The question is where store such hashes? At the origin level? At the package level via ’properties’? Using an external service? As Disarchive database?

Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

Hi, Timothy Sample skribis: > One way to handle things like partial checkouts is to revisit storing > SWHIDs with our origins. If you have the directory ID, you can just > download the directory from SWH without worrying about SVN at all. It > would also give us an easy way to handle Bazaar

Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

Hi, Vagrant Cascadian writes: > On 2022-01-18, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Timothy Sample skribis: >>> A really important thing to do at this point is to verify that some >>> reasonable looking computation is covered by what we are doing already. >>> For instance, is every source used to build

Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

On 2022-01-18, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Timothy Sample skribis: >> A really important thing to do at this point is to verify that some >> reasonable looking computation is covered by what we are doing already. >> For instance, is every source used to build Guile (or Python or R) >> preserved?

Re: Preservation of Guix report 2022-01-16

Hi, Timothy Sample skribis: > I’ve published a new preservation of Guix report: > > https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/latest/ > > Actually, the URL is , but I > thought having a way to reference the latest report would be helpful. Nice! [...] > A

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-12-06

Hi Timothy, On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 21:02, Timothy Sample wrote: > Thanks! Really cool! As mentioned in [1], upstream of one disappeared: https://code.divoplade.fr/mkdir-p.git and the package had been removed by

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-12-06

Hello, Timothy Sample skribis: > > > Since the last report, I added many more reference categories and moved > them to the database. The new categories are 'hg', 'svn', 'cvs', 'bzr', > 'tar-bz2', 'tar', 'zip', and 'text'. Of these, only 'tar'

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

Hi, On Mon, 06 Dec 2021 at 14:10, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > zimoun skribis: > >> Where I am surprised is that PoG does not return 'python-scikit-learn' when: >> >> $ guix lint -c archival python-scikit-learn >> gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm:946:5: python-scikit-learn@0.24.2: >> scheduled

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

Hi! Timothy Sample skribis: > Here’s a new version of the Preservation of Guix Report: > > The PoG reports are all 404 right now. > Here’s what I wrote: > >> This version has a breakdown by different origin types. The good >> news is that Git

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

zimoun skribis: > Where I am surprised is that PoG does not return 'python-scikit-learn' when: > > $ guix lint -c archival python-scikit-learn > gnu/packages/machine-learning.scm:946:5: python-scikit-learn@0.24.2: > scheduled Software Heritage archival This is most likely due to

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

Hi, On Fri, 03 Dec 2021 at 10:02, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > zimoun writes: > >> F "git://pumpa.branchable.com/" > > This has moved to http://source.pumpa.branchable.com/ Thanks. Waiting the easy fix (perfect first contribution for Outreachy :-)) as specified by #52257 [1], let save it:

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

zimoun writes: > F "git://pumpa.branchable.com/" This has moved to http://source.pumpa.branchable.com/ -- Ricardo

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

Hi, On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 at 19:52, Timothy Sample wrote: > Here’s a new version of the Preservation of Guix Report: > > Cool! > That’s still basically true this month, but we have a few more missing > Git sources. Well, we need more tools to

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-11-30

Timothy Sample writes: > [W]e are starting to lose sources! If you look at the graph of > commits, you can see a sharp increase in missing sources for recent > commits. It looks like a problem on the SWH side. Visiting [1] and > selecting “Show all visits”, you can see that the nixguix loader

Re: Preservation of Guix Report 2021-10-31

Hi, I am not able to find in guix-devel archives this email with the Message-ID 874k8xrn49@ngyro.com. Below the complete header. Do I miss something? Cheers, simon On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 at 15:49, Timothy Sample wrote: > Hi all! > > Here’s a new version of the Preservation of Guix Report:

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hello! Timothy Sample skribis: > Ludovic Courtès writes: [...] >> This is truly awesome! (Did you manage to grab all that info with the >> default rate limit?!) > > Yes, but I have another trick. The “known” endpoint [1]. If you > already know the SWHIDs you want to check, you can check

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi again, Timothy Sample writes: > Yes, but I have another trick. The “known” endpoint [1]. If you > already know the SWHIDs you want to check, you can check 1,000 per call. > With the anonymous rate limit, I can check 120,000 every hour, which is > plenty. > > [1] >

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hey, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Timothy Sample skribis: > >> Early this summer I did a bunch of work trying to figure out which Guix >> sources are preserved by the SWH archive. I’m finally ready to share >> some preliminary results! >> >> https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/2021-10-20/ >> >>

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi Timothy, On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 12:26, Timothy Sample wrote: > Fixing this in Disarchive is going to make a *huge* difference, so that > is now high priority for me (it’s a one line change, but I want to fix > it, release it, update Guix, and recompute the report). Cool! Excited to get the

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi Ludo, On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 22:47, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > ‘guix lint -c archival’ uses ‘lookup-origin-revision’, which is a good > approximation, but it’s not 100% reliable because tags can be modified > and that procedure only tells you that a same-named tag was found, not > that it’s

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi Timothy! Timothy Sample skribis: > Early this summer I did a bunch of work trying to figure out which Guix > sources are preserved by the SWH archive. I’m finally ready to share > some preliminary results! > > https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/2021-10-20/ > > This report is already quite

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi zimoun, zimoun writes: > 2. For still unknown reasons, the bridge between SWH and Disarchive has > some holes. For instance, > > $ guix lint -c archive znc > gnu/packages/messaging.scm:996:12: znc@1.8.2: Disarchive entry refers > to non-existent SWH directory

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi Timothy, On Wed, 20 Oct 2021 at 15:48, Timothy Sample wrote: > Early this summer I did a bunch of work trying to figure out which Guix > sources are preserved by the SWH archive. I’m finally ready to share > some preliminary results! > > https://ngyro.com/pog-reports/2021-10-20/ Cool!

Re: Preservation of Guix Report

Hi again, Rereading this a few hours later, I found an error. Timothy Sample writes: > It’s surprising to me that SWH is not already getting these from > “sources.json”. I picked an arbitrary one, “rust-quote-0.6”, and it’s > simply not in “sources.json”. It is in fact there! I made a