From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Hinsen Subject: bug#22629: Channels! Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 17:30:14 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87vb5vsffd.fsf@gnu.org> <87pny2iks2.fsf@gnu.org> <877ekagtg9.fsf@netris.org> <87efeh9rm8.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59554) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fv2Qz-0002ir-R4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 11:31:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fv2Qw-0005Sf-E4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 11:31:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:60509) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fv2Qw-0005SS-94 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 11:31:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fv2Qw-0005yL-4n for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2018 11:31:02 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87efeh9rm8.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 22629@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Ludo, > Mark=E2=80=99s concern is not about whether packages are the latest versi= on, > etc. It=E2=80=99s about the constraints that could result from widespread > development of channels outside Guix proper: technically all of Guix is That's how I understood it as well. If/when Guix becomes somebody else's dependency, then there will be pressure on stability in Guix itself. My point is that this will happen anyway if Guix is adopted more widely. Every manifest file, personal or shared as part of a software package ("guix.scm"), relies on the same technical details as a channel. Introducing channels only makes the issue more visible. And this is really the same issue as with the stability of the packages themselves, Guix being a kind of superpackage. Most people want agility for the software layer they are most concerned with, and stability for all layers below it. For Mark (and certainly others here), Guix happens to be the layer they are most concerned with. > I=E2=80=99d rather not build fancy mechanisms just for the sake of extern= al > channels, and I certainly don=E2=80=99t want to commit to API stability. = We At this point, certainly not. But I agree with Mark that, if channels "take off", there will be pressure in that direction. Konrad.