From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: guix is the guildhall that we always wanted!
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:24:36 +0100
Message-ID: <87lgs4f8nf.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87zigl3wph.fsf@pobox.com> <87a88kanjq.fsf@netris.org>
	<87o9x0uag9.fsf@gnu.org>
	<162ed651-45b6-0521-7c7e-46967ef11bac@gmx.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47744)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1copzv-0008Mo-CJ
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 07:24:44 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1copzs-0008PB-8B
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 07:24:43 -0400
In-Reply-To: <162ed651-45b6-0521-7c7e-46967ef11bac@gmx.net> (Florian Paul
	Schmidt's message of "Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:01:40 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Florian Paul Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Hi,

Florian Paul Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net> skribis:

> On 03/16/2017 11:24 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>> I think having repos maintained elsewhere is OKish, but it=E2=80=99s tru=
e that
>> it requires people who maintain those repos to follow closely what=E2=80=
=99s
>> going on in Guix proper because we=E2=80=99re not guaranteeing API stabi=
lity.
>
> Wouldn't taking the functional/reproducibility aspect one step further
> migitate this issue? I.e. maintainers of decentralized repos just need
> to have as input the precise guix version they are using?

It=E2=80=99s an interesting thought and may be useful in some scenarios.
The =E2=80=9Cchannels=E2=80=9D proposal by Pjotr and Leo looks at this issu=
e:

  https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D22629#19

However, as Andy wrote, there are situations where you=E2=80=99d rather avo=
id
having separate dependency graphs since that hinders composition.  For
example, you could end up with a situation where your guildhall repo is
stuck with Guile 2.2.0 and libc 2.24, even though the main Guix repo has
Guile 2.2.3 and libc 2.25.

Ludo=E2=80=99.