Hi Guix, emacs-guix (also known as guix.el) has been broken for some time. I submitted https://gitlab.com/emacs-guix/emacs-guix/-/merge_requests/8 to support guix versions >= 1.1. However, two changes also have to occur for proper support. * Some bindings will need to be exposed on the guix side. I submitted patches for this already: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/44619 * The guix package in gnu/packages/package-management.scm will need to refer to a commit including those patches. That leads to a more nebulous question: should there be "stable" and "unstable" versions of the guix package in guix? Stable might be pinned to a release, but guix-unstable might be updated occasionally. What do you think? - John
Hi John,
John Soo <jsoo1@asu.edu> skribis:
> I submitted https://gitlab.com/emacs-guix/emacs-guix/-/merge_requests/8
> to support guix versions >= 1.1. However, two changes also have to
> occur for proper support.
>
> * Some bindings will need to be exposed on the guix side. I submitted
> patches for this already: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/44619
>
> * The guix package in gnu/packages/package-management.scm will need to
> refer to a commit including those patches.
>
> That leads to a more nebulous question: should there be "stable" and
> "unstable" versions of the guix package in guix? Stable might be pinned
> to a release, but guix-unstable might be updated occasionally.
As I wrote in another message before reaching this one, my understanding
is that “we” now have to take over maintenance of Emacs-Guix. As part
of that process, we can discuss what interfaces would be useful to
Emacs-Guix and arrange to keep them stable.
I think we can do more if the two are developed hand in hand. Let’s see
what we can achieve!
Ludo’.
Hi Ludo,
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
> As I wrote in another message before reaching this one, my understanding
> is that “we” now have to take over maintenance of Emacs-Guix. As part
> of that process, we can discuss what interfaces would be useful to
> Emacs-Guix and arrange to keep them stable.
>
> I think we can do more if the two are developed hand in hand. Let’s see
> what we can achieve!
Exciting!
What do we do next?
- John
Hi John, Thank you for reviving guix.el. :-) On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 at 07:44, John Soo <jsoo1@asu.edu> wrote: > * The guix package in gnu/packages/package-management.scm will need to > refer to a commit including those patches. > > That leads to a more nebulous question: should there be "stable" and > "unstable" versions of the guix package in guix? Stable might be pinned > to a release, but guix-unstable might be updated occasionally. The package emacs-guix depends on the package guix because of reasons I am not sure to well understand to explain them. The same problem, IIUC, happens with Guix Workflow Language (package gwl). Ricardo provided a draft patch here: https://yhetil.org/guix-devel/87tuuayplb.fsf@elephly.net Well, maybe one way to answer to this nebulous question should to put some love in this direction. I do not know, maybe I miss the point. All the best, simon
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 383 bytes --] zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes: > The package emacs-guix depends on the package guix because of reasons I > am not sure to well understand to explain them. In my experience there is no need to depend on Guix, we should be using the current Guix. This would fix most issues that users have been having for years ;) -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 511 bytes --]
Hi John,
John Soo <jsoo1@asu.edu> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> As I wrote in another message before reaching this one, my understanding
>> is that “we” now have to take over maintenance of Emacs-Guix. As part
>> of that process, we can discuss what interfaces would be useful to
>> Emacs-Guix and arrange to keep them stable.
>>
>> I think we can do more if the two are developed hand in hand. Let’s see
>> what we can achieve!
>
> Exciting!
>
> What do we do next?
To me the top priority would be to fix the ‘emacs-guix’ package in Guix,
either by adding a patch, grabbing a Git snapshot, or using an older
Geiser version.
Tagging an Emacs-Guix release would also be an option, once you’ve
clarified with Alex Kost and everyone involved that it’s OK for you to
do so.
I’ve requested the creation of a Git repo at Savannah. Again, if and
once everyone involved is OK with the move, you can move the repo
there. In the meantime you can obviously use a copy hosted elsewhere.
And then, you’ll probably have to recruit among the fearless and
creative Emacs hackers lurking here. :-)
Ludo’.