Re: guix is the guildhall that we always wanted!

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Florian Paul Schmidt <address@hidden> skribis:

> On 03/16/2017 11:24 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> I think having repos maintained elsewhere is OKish, but it’s true that
>> it requires people who maintain those repos to follow closely what’s
>> going on in Guix proper because we’re not guaranteeing API stability.
>
> Wouldn't taking the functional/reproducibility aspect one step further
> migitate this issue? I.e. maintainers of decentralized repos just need
> to have as input the precise guix version they are using?

It’s an interesting thought and may be useful in some scenarios.
The “channels” proposal by Pjotr and Leo looks at this issue:

  https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=22629#19

However, as Andy wrote, there are situations where you’d rather avoid
having separate dependency graphs since that hinders composition.  For
example, you could end up with a situation where your guildhall repo is
stuck with Guile 2.2.0 and libc 2.24, even though the main Guix repo has
Guile 2.2.3 and libc 2.25.

Ludo’.