Hi guix-devel! On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 03:49 PM, Josselin Poiret wrote:
> Hi everyone, > > Andreas Enge <andr...@enge.fr> writes: > >> I volunteer to follow your lead, but also have no clue what is actually >> expected. > > I would also like to give a hand! > Count me in as well! I only did some spot fixes the last round, but at least I have some familiarity with what happened. I don't have any particular expertise but I'm happy to help coordinate overall, test, and generally do some cat herding. And now that I have commit access I hope I can really help move things through with review and pushing ready patches. Unfortunately had some other stuff come up for the last few months since I got access, but I should have more time starting in a week or so. On that front, I think looking through relevant core-updates patches (the Mesa ones in particular, for me) is a good first step for review and I'll try building on my end to see how far I get. >> [...] >> Actually I am wondering whether the first step of killing these untamed >> non-feature branches would not be to build and merge staging? It is based >> on master, supposed to contain only medium sized changes, but which I >> suspect end up being a world-rebuilding cluster of changes. > > You're right, for this to smoothly transition into the "feature branch > workflow" (if that's actually what we want to do) I guess we also need > to lay out a plan first, and prepare for the post-c.u-merge > world. Getting rid of staging first could be an easier exercise, > followed by c-u. I was planning on taking your notes of the Guix days > and opening a discussion about how we could concretely transition to > this new workflow, I can maybe do that this evening. > I need to catch up on the thread about feature branches and I'm looking forward to that as well. It has something that I have long wanted and will gladly help in that transition and doing what I can to make that go smoothly. John