GNU bug report logs -
#22629
Towards a new 'guix pull'
Previous Next
Reported by: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 10:36:02 UTC
Severity: important
Merged with 28471
Done: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Hello Guix,
Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org> skribis:
> Both of you seem to have reached the conclusion that third-party
> channels are a prerequisite for having a 'stable' branch. I disagree.
Same here. We could already be doing that (I’m skeptical about the
feasibility, maintainability, and relevance of a “stable” branch in the
sense of Debian stable, but that’s another story.)
> I agree with both of you that a 'stable' branch of Guix would be
> tremendously useful. I've often wanted it myself, and I still do.
>
> My point is that I want to keep our APIs internal and unfrozen for the
> same reason that Linux, the kernel project, does. Linux refuses to
> support out-of-tree drivers and modules, and thereby retains its freedom
> to change their internal APIs. Often they change how things work
> internally and this entails doing massive find-replace on every driver
> in the tree. This has been a crucially important factor in their
> long-term success.
I had this example in mind too: the kernel technically supports
out-of-tree modules, but kernel developers have always resisted pressure
to freeze APIs.
Because this policy has been stated upfront very clearly and has
remained unchanged, out-of-tree module developers know that that the
compatibility burden is on them. There’s flexibility, along with a
strong incentive to get things in the mainline kernel.
This is the outcome I’d like to achieve: give users some welcome
flexibility, but make it clear that it’s best-effort.
Ludo’.
This bug report was last modified 6 years and 322 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.