Re: Warning on using GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH

[ng0 <contact.ng0@cryptolab.net>]

On 17-02-09 15:08:35, John Darrington wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 01:30:48PM +0000, Pjotr Prins wrote:
>      @FOSDEM we concluded that GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH does not necessarily work
>      that wel. I added to my guix-notes the following:
>      
>      +Note that, even though GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH can be a feasible way of
>      +adding and maintaining packages, it has two largish downsides: (1) it
>      +is removed from the main package tree and therefore not easily shared
>      +and integrated and (2) to remain compatible you need to juggle two git
>      +trees which may go out of synch.
> 
> 
> Those are indeed cavaets.  But whether they are "downsides" or "largish" is
> a matter for individual users to decide.
> 
> Some people 1) don't want to share the pacakges they create; and/or 2) are
> prepared to accept the effort keeping the two things in sync.
> 
> J'
> 
>      
> 
> -- 
> Avoid eavesdropping.  Send strong encrypted email.
> PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 
> fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285  A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
> See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.
> 

There's a third case: packages which can simply be "as they are" and
knowing they will not end up in upstream master tree.
It is easier for me to maintain and experiment with what's the best way
to provide multiple packages of development versions which depend on
each other in a guix-package-path, rather than maintain yet another
branch or yet another full blown guix master repository.

-- 
ng0 -- https://www.inventati.org/patternsinthechaos/