Xinglu Chen schreef op zo 06-02-2022 om 12:50 [+0100]:
> Because of the way ‘%updaters’ in (guix upstream) works, the Repology
> updater is the first or second updater that is used (since it
> technically works on ever package), but because of the limitations I
> mentioned above, the result might not always be the best.  The Repology
> updater is mostly useful for things that don’t already have an updater,
> e.g., ‘maven-dependency-tree’.  Would it make sense to hard-code the
> ‘%updaters’ variable and put the Repology last in the list?

I would prefer not to hardcode %updaters and keep the current
discovery mechanism, such that people can experiment with updaters
outside a git checkout of guix and in channels.

FWIW it would be useful to have the same mechanism for importers.

However, it might be a good idea to do some _postprocessing_ on
the discovered list of updaters, e.g. they could be sorted on
'genericity' with 'stable-sort' (*):

(define (genericity x)
  (cond ((it is "generic-SOMETHING") 1)
        ((it is repology) 2)
        (#true 0)))

(define (less x y)
  (<= (genericity x) (genericity y)))

(*) stable-sort and not sort, to preserve alphabetical ordering
for updaters with the same genericity.

Greetings,
Maxime.