Leo Prikler writes: >> From my understanding, the “implemented” plan is described by Maxim >> here: >> >> > Using this plan as a starting point, I think renpy counts as a non- > variant package relying on some python2-variant. > >> I just want to point that it is less work to transfer a functional >> and >> supported by upstream package than to transfer a package starting to >> have issues. Other said, I think it is easier to find motivation to >> do >> the transfer for this previous case than to do some “janitor” work >> later. For what my opinion is worth. :-) > Fair enough, I could open up a merge request to have renpy in Guix Past > "ahead of time", but OTOH I feel like `guix time-machine` offers > similar benefits. If we're going to *mirror* python packages, because > they will soon be broken, I think it would also be a good idea to start > from python2 instead of leaf packages. I feel like keeping it all in Guix proper but vaguely "moving things toward Python 3 wherever possible" is the best approach for now. An approach like the one Maxim suggested in the above link sounds good. Moving Ren'Py to Guix-Past would be fine, I guess, but I have to admit it feels a little strange. After all, Ren'Py is neither stale nor unmaintained. However, some of its dependencies are (like Python 2), and their plan for upgrading to Python 3 sounds like it will take years. -- Chris