[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#73197] [PATCH] gnu: julia: Update to 1.9.3.
From: |
Efraim Flashner |
Subject: |
[bug#73197] [PATCH] gnu: julia: Update to 1.9.3. |
Date: |
Sun, 22 Sep 2024 10:24:03 +0300 |
On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:29:41PM +0200, Simon Tournier wrote:
> Hi Ludo,
>
> On lun., 16 sept. 2024 at 11:47, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > I would hope we can migrate straight to 1.9, but if that’s too tricky, I
> > agree we should follow the plan you describe.
> >
> > Let me take a look at those failure to see how bad it is.
>
> I would suggest to have julia-next.
>
> And some ’package-with-julia’ transformation similar as
> package-with-python or package-with-ocaml.
>
> Somehow, that’s always painful to upgrade Julia because of the Julia
> world rebuild and some (more than some?) package breakages.
>
> That way it would easier to have the CI following the branch team-julia
> where regular package would go, as well as julia-next upgrade. And the
> manifest could build both set of packages (julia and julia-next) using
> the transformation.
>
> Users willing stable just install ’julia’ and ’julia-’ packages.
> Adventurous users install ’julia-next’ and ’julia-*-next’.
>
> WDYT?
The problem is that the julia-build-system needs to be adapted to the
newer versions of Julia. IMO the benefit of having Julia and Julia-next
is that the julia-* packages are packaged, but those needing a newer
version of Julia can still get it from Guix. Then when we adapt the
julia-build-system we can deprecate julia-next, or have it point to the
next release.
--
Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> רנשלפ םירפא
GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature