From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Wingo Subject: Re: guix is the guildhall that we always wanted! Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:30:42 +0100 Message-ID: <87efxwnw3x.fsf@igalia.com> References: <87zigl3wph.fsf@pobox.com> <87a88kanjq.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60896) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1conHn-0003Mi-CW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 04:31:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1conHm-0005PQ-DX for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 04:30:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87a88kanjq.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:01:45 -0400") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, guile-user@gnu.org On Thu 16 Mar 2017 23:01, Mark H Weaver writes: > If [Guix] starts encouraging a decentralized approach, that would > result in strong pressure on us to freeze our API, which includes even > such details as which module each package is exported from. This > would drastically reduce the freedom Guix has to evolve the way its > packages are specified. I get what you are saying. I think that if a future guildhall is decentralized but uses Guix it needs to minimize its burden on Guix. That could mean that the packages are actually specified in a different DSL with different stability characteristics -- for example that DSL could call specification->package under the hood for example, like Ludovic mentions. (I should mention that this idea of using Guix and especially all its errors are my own -- haven't talked to others about it yet!) Which module a package definition is in is a good example of something not to depend on. Basically I think Guix should be able to do what it wants to. The stability characteristics that Guix already has are sufficient for a Guildhall -- no additional maintenance burden intended and I hope no additional burden imposed. WDYT? Andy