From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Using a shared Guix store (was RE: [Bio-packaging] testing out guix) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 10:39:10 +0200 Message-ID: <87h9pce79t.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877fr0i0kl.fsf@mdc-berlin.de> <3784bfce22f4406f8ee2d3affda0474c@exchsrv2.sgc.loc> <87oak4zxo8.fsf@gnu.org> <1436378615368.30302@stowers.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50774) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZDTqH-00071K-T7 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 04:39:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZDTqF-0003yK-LO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 04:39:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1436378615368.30302@stowers.org> (Malcolm Cook's message of "Wed, 8 Jul 2015 18:03:35 +0000") 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: "Cook, Malcolm" Cc: Guix-devel , 'Pjotr Prins' , "'bio-packaging@mailman.open-bio.org'" "Cook, Malcolm" skribis: >> Another one, which I think Ricardo has been investigating lately, would = be to >> have users manage their profiles via the Web user interface, >> guix-web: . (The video >> > 01__GNU_Guix__The_Emacs_of_Distros.webm> >> has a demo starting at around 23mn.) > > Hmm, it is not clear to me how this would play out in a multi-user enviro= nment. Having a web server that could alter per-user profiles sounds like = a recipe for more confusion, rather than a solution. > > In any case, in my opinion, it would be a mistake to have depend on anoth= er tool (such as guix-web, or something similar) to implement functionality= that could not be gained at using command-line guix. Don't you agree? I=E2=80=99m just mentioning it as an additional option, for those who like = it. >> >> Ultimately, the correct fix is to allow remote guix clients to >> >> communicate with a central guix daemon. The daemon does not even >> >> need to be aware of remote connections if guix clients can >> >> transparently connect via SSH and send RPCs to the socket. This is n= ot yet >> implemented. >> > >> > Sounds great. On the roadmap? >>=20 >> Definitely. There are details to be sorted out (SSH vs. plain old socke= t), but >> we should discuss it and =E2=80=9Cget it done.=E2=80=9D > > Are there any signposts on this road-map emerging? Is there any way I ca= n help, such as review proposals for how the CLI would work, I'd be happy t= o chip in. Not ready to start slinging guile though. Maybe later (the old= lisper in me revels at the thought). Yes, one way to help would be by trying a simple setup using Guix as it currently exists, coupled with socat: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D20381 If you could test this and provide feedback about the other options discussed there, that would be great (please email 20381@debbugs.gnu.org.) So no ETA, but once we have feedback from you, Ricardo, and other interested parties, it will be easier to make a choice and implement it. :-) Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.