| Message ID | 20211128154110.25964-1-philipk@posteo.net |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bug#52162] gnu: subversion: Add --enable-plaintext-password-storage flag | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| cbaines/comparison | success | View comparision |
| cbaines/git branch | success | View Git branch |
| cbaines/applying patch | success | View Laminar job |
| cbaines/issue | success | View issue |
| cbaines/comparison | success | View comparision |
| cbaines/git branch | success | View Git branch |
| cbaines/applying patch | success | View Laminar job |
| cbaines/issue | success | View issue |
On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 03:41:10PM +0000, Philip Kaludercic wrote: > * version-control.scm (subversion): Enable plain text passwords while > compiling SVN, undoing the controversial move to disable them by the > maintainers. See also > https://lists.apache.org/thread/b6g2hx2m3s117wcmno08opl874ons3q8. Thanks for the patch! > - #:configure-flags '("--enable-static=no") > + #:configure-flags '("--enable-static=no" > + "--enable-plaintext-password-storage") In general, in Guix, we aim to distribute software as it was released by upstream. We do make changes to fix bugs, but it's outside our normal activity for us to change defaults from upstream. This is partly a pragmatic choice (less work to maintain) and partly a way in which we choose to be "good citizens" with respect to our role as distributors. But also, because Guix makes it easier for users to customize their packages compared to other systems like APT and RPM. I would like to hear other peoples' opinions before we decide about this patch.
I’ve read the discussion that ends with an email[1] by Nathan Hartman expressing support for enabling the feature but disabling it by default in configuration. Hence I think it would be reasonable to wait for a new release addressing it. In the meantime users can define their own package variant with this configure flag added. It doesn’t need to be changed in Guix itself, because this only affects users of the package, not other packages that have subversion as an input. So it’s enough to add a new leaf package. As a compromise I think it would be acceptable to add a separate subversion-plaintext (or whatever) package variant, which will be superseded by the official subversion package as soon as a new release is made. [1] https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/202110.mbox/%3cCAJT2EHr7wBfMdg0df7hEnv9+JedcjRkFCzP+q21=dvcWrPv84Q@mail.gmail.com%3e
diff --git a/gnu/packages/version-control.scm b/gnu/packages/version-control.scm index 10487c6939..ff3dc61456 100644 --- a/gnu/packages/version-control.scm +++ b/gnu/packages/version-control.scm @@ -1969,7 +1969,8 @@ (define-public subversion (arguments '(#:parallel-tests? #f ; TODO Seems to cause test failures on ; i686-linux - #:configure-flags '("--enable-static=no") + #:configure-flags '("--enable-static=no" + "--enable-plaintext-password-storage") #:phases (modify-phases %standard-phases (add-after 'configure 'patch-libtool-wrapper-ls