GNU bug report logs - #40326
Remove deprecated packages

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 40326 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 40326 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Raghav Gururajan" <raghavgururajan <at> disroot.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: Remove deprecated packages
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 17:03:42 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello Guix!

Please find the attached patch to remove deprecated package-definitions of bctoolbox and ortp.

Regards,
RG.

[old.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 40326 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Raghav Gururajan <raghavgururajan <at> disroot.org>
Cc: 40326 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#40326] Remove deprecated packages
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:01:38 -0400

On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 05:03:42PM +0000, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
> Hello Guix!
> 
> Please find the attached patch to remove deprecated package-definitions of bctoolbox and ortp.

These packages haven't been deprecated, as I understand it. That would
mean they had been defined with the deprecated-package procedure for a
while.

Message #11 received at 40326 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: Raghav Gururajan <raghavgururajan <at> disroot.org>, 40326 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#40326] Remove deprecated packages
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 21:05:00 -0400

Hello Leo and Raghav,

Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 05:03:42PM +0000, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
>> Hello Guix!
>>
>> Please find the attached patch to remove deprecated package-definitions of bctoolbox and ortp.
>
> These packages haven't been deprecated, as I understand it. That would
> mean they had been defined with the deprecated-package procedure for a
> while.

I think it's hard to understand why this is done here without context.

Raghav has started working on packaging Linphone and has made new
definitions for bctoolbox and ortp in a new (gnu packages linphone)
module.

So these packages are going to be moved rather than be outright
removed.

Raghav, for backward compatibility, when me move or rename a package, we
bind the deprecated symbols using the define-deprecated macro (from
(guix deprecation)).

In this case, it'd look like, for example:

(define-deprecated btcoolbox linphone:bctoolbox)

For an actual example, you can "git show 8ab060b68b3".

Maxim

Message #14 received at 40326 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Cc: Raghav Gururajan <raghavgururajan <at> disroot.org>, 40326 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#40326] Remove deprecated packages
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:59:37 -0400

Hello,

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Hello Leo and Raghav,
>
> Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 05:03:42PM +0000, Raghav Gururajan wrote:
>>> Hello Guix!
>>>
>>> Please find the attached patch to remove deprecated package-definitions of bctoolbox and ortp.
>>
>> These packages haven't been deprecated, as I understand it. That would
>> mean they had been defined with the deprecated-package procedure for a
>> while.
>
> I think it's hard to understand why this is done here without context.
>
> Raghav has started working on packaging Linphone and has made new
> definitions for bctoolbox and ortp in a new (gnu packages linphone)
> module.
>
> So these packages are going to be moved rather than be outright
> removed.
>
> Raghav, for backward compatibility, when me move or rename a package, we
> bind the deprecated symbols using the define-deprecated macro (from
> (guix deprecation)).
>
> In this case, it'd look like, for example:
>
> (define-deprecated btcoolbox linphone:bctoolbox)
>
> For an actual example, you can "git show 8ab060b68b3".
>
> Maxim

Sorry, it seems I was wrong about this.  A simple move of a package
definition does not warrant defining deprecation symbols (thanks
Tobias).

The packages should only be removed after (or better yet -- at the same
time) their replacement are added, to prevent breaking someone's
manifest.

Maxim

Message #19 received at 40326-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
To: "Raghav Gururajan" <raghavgururajan <at> disroot.org>
Cc: 40326-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#40326] Remove deprecated packages
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 16:44:13 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Raghav,

these were used by kopete and bluez-alsa.

I've updated those references too and pushed the result to guix master as
commit 9be3ab7bbe41234d861062e0037d3bd24cbba274.

Still wondering what to do with the "-fPIC" that is now gone from bctoolbox.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #22 received at 40326-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Raghav Gururajan" <raghavgururajan <at> disroot.org>
To: "Danny Milosavljevic" <dannym <at> scratchpost.org>
Cc: 40326-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#40326] Remove deprecated packages
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2020 14:54:26 +0000

Hi Danny!

> these were used by kopete and bluez-alsa.
> 
> I've updated those references too and pushed the result to guix master as
> commit 9be3ab7bbe41234d861062e0037d3bd24cbba274.

Thank you so much.

> Still wondering what to do with the "-fPIC" that is now gone from bctoolbox.

I think we can deal with when we get any errors related to that in the future. :-)

Regards,
RG.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.