Re: Ensuring we don't break user systems

[Dan Partelly]

It also has the effect that guix is pulled from a reasonably tested branch and 
it is proven that it compiles. Given how central the package manager is to the 
GuixSD, this is something which IMO should have been done from long ago. IT 
saves users time, 
and show the developers care , if nothing else. But yeah, this proposal is IMO 
sound both technically and socially.

> system or profile will always succeed and use substitutes, but it
> doesn't give any guarantee on adding a package to the system or a user
> profile.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 29, 2018, at 12:40, Julien Lepiller <address@hidden>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi guix!
>>> 
>>> I recently had an idea about how we should organize ourworkflow for
>>> post 1.0. The goal is to ensure that users can always update their
>>> system.
>>> 
>>> Currently, we push updatesto master and they may not build on other
>>> architectures or break dependant packages. This is bad because a
>>> security update might get blocked because an unrelated package now
>>> fails to build.
>>> 
>>> I'd like to propose the following policy:
>>> 
>>> We wouldcreate a new branch, stable, that would be used by guix
>>> pull. We would continue to push to master or other branches.
>>> 
>>> Once hydra finds it can build at least as many packages in master
>>> than stable, it would make master the new stable, hopefully once a
>>> day or so.
>>> 
>>> Security updates would be provided to users by a seéarate channel,
>>> to ensure important updates are delivered immediately to users.
>>> 
>>> Another possibility is to use a patch management system like gerrit
>>> with a similar policy.
>>> 
>>> WDYT?
>>> 
> 
>