From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
References: <CAJ3okZ3tLoq-YcXoMvpjtRQTKV+W0DVDeHAH0h8-kChQ7fkjWQ@mail.gmail.com> <87ef3hceuc.fsf@kyleam.com>
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workflow: Consider unspecified free inputs when checking
 cache.
In-reply-to: <87ef3hceuc.fsf@kyleam.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 09:05:42 +0200
Message-ID: <87ftnwsu61.fsf@elephly.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
Cc: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>, gwl-devel@gnu.org
List-ID: <gwl-devel.gnu.org>


Hi Kyle,

>   (5) the workflow unambiguously specifies how to generate each output.
>       I don't want to have to document that "to generate THIS, you
>       should run `guix workflow --input=3DTHIS=3DTHAT'".  I want to make a
>       blanket statement that "you can run `<workflow cmd> TARGET' to
>       generate any desired output, which will do whatever is needed to
>       make that happen".  (I know this isn't currently possible with
>       GWL.)

Spoken like a Snakemake user :)

The GWL has no fleshed out concept of targets, at least not in the way
that GNU Make presents them to the user.  The GWL=E2=80=99s primary abstrac=
tion
is the process.

However, we should be able to tell the GWL to only run those processes
that are required to reach a certain output.  This would require a
procedure that sections the graph of workflow processes.

--
Ricardo