From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net>
Subject: bug#32022: bug#22629: =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9CStable=E2=80=9D?= branch
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:33:19 +0200
Message-ID: <m1k1o6akr4.fsf@fastmail.net>
References: <87vb5vsffd.fsf@gnu.org> <87pny2iks2.fsf@gnu.org>
	<877ekagtg9.fsf@netris.org> <87zhx5msfl.fsf@pompo.co>
	<87lg8pccys.fsf_-_@netris.org> <87zhx59gh3.fsf@elephly.net>
	<m1wos82y70.fsf@ordinateur-de-catherine--konrad.home>
	<875zzs9wzl.fsf@netris.org> <m1d0u0qi4v.fsf@fastmail.net>
	<874lfcxd2v.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87wos8lzcj.fsf@pompo.co>
	<878t4nqzqv.fsf@gnu.org> <m1h8jaq3h0.fsf@fastmail.net>
	<874lfarh6w.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44586)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1fvgkg-0007Ep-3z
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 06:34:06 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1fvgkd-000867-MY
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 06:34:06 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:34782)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1fvgkd-000863-It
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 06:34:03 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1fvgkd-0005SC-F6
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 06:34:03 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.32022.B32022.153571160820902@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <874lfarh6w.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "bug-Guix" <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: 26608@debbugs.gnu.org, 22629@debbugs.gnu.org, 32022@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Ludo,

> What do you mean by =E2=80=9Climit it to channels=E2=80=9D?  =E2=80=98%de=
fault-channels=E2=80=99 is an
> alias for the official Guix channel (IOW, Guix itself.)

Fine, but I rarely care about all of Guix, or all of any other channel.
I care about the small subset of packages that I actually use.

Better yet, with a per-manifest/profile approach, I could put my most
critical packages in a special profile and get updates for them more
quickly, while still working only with substitutes.

BTW, just out of curiosity: for how many commits in Guix history all
packages could be built successfully? Is that the rule of the exception?

> Yes, we could do that, and even maybe more sophisticated things (e.g.,
> looking at the commit log to determine whether security fixes are
> available, and adjusting the strategy accordingly.)

Nice!

> What I find interesting is that we can provide the tools to support such
> policies, and then users can choose or implement the policy they want
> directly in ~/.config/guix/channels.scm.

I agree, it's nice to give people the tools they need to implement their
own policy.

Konrad.