[Re-sending]

Todor Kondić <tk.code@protonmail.com> writes:

> What is the advantage of having different profiles to just defining
> different top-level packages propagating all programs and libraries
> one needs and placing them in a custom channel? My feeling is,
> defining a package is cleaner than manifests+profiles, because it does
> not involve creating yet another shell program that needs to be
> sourced.

This is a good question!

To be clear, it's not really a "shell program" but the ~/.profile /
~/.bash_profile, which is usually a default config file (it's part of
the user profile skeleton).

Pros & cons I can think of now:

- "Bundle Packages" into the same profile do not solve the problem of
  file conflicts.  (E.g. you can't install 2 packages that both have a
  file of the same name.)

- When multiple Bundle Packages are installed, I feel that it's harder
  to know from which Bundle Package a package comes.

- Nit: Writing the Bundle Packages + channel is a little more code than
  manifests.

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/