GNU bug report logs - #38529
Make --pure the default for `guix environment'?

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Pierre Neidhardt <mail <at> ambrevar.xyz>

Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2019 15:43:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #131 received at 38529 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net>
Cc: Guix Devel <guix-devel <at> gnu.org>, 38529 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#38529: Make --ad-hoc the default for guix environment
 proposed deprecation mechanism
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 13:03:05 +0100
Hi Konrad,

On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 12:24, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen <at> fastmail.net> wrote:

> The problem is scripts circulating in public repositories, tutorials,
> etc. New users will find them and use them for inspiration. It's very
> discouraging to see examples from tutorials fail or do something weird.

As I said, I am not convinced because it lacks concrete examples.
Personally, I do not know Guix ressource outside the Guix ecosystem.


> The main precedent is the Python 2->3 transition. There are tons of
> GitHub repositories with Python code but no indication if it's 2, 3, or
> both. I even had to use one that executed with either 2 or 3, but gave
> different results. It takes a lot of motivation to persist.

Except that "guix environment" will raise warnings.
Whatever.


> For guix, there's the additional issue that we use the reproducibility
> of builds as an argument. Non-reproducible examples are then a bit of a
> credibility problem.

I agree.
I do not want to fight about "backward compatibility".


As I said, talking about "guix environment", my opinion is that the
cost of the change is low.
However, we cannot know this cost, only probe and estimate: using my
probings, I estimate the cost is low.

IMHO, in this case, there is 2 ways to make a decision:
 - more probings to estimate more precisely;
or
 - say: "no backward compatibility breakage"

I am fine with both. :-)
 - I report my use-case: no cost at all
 - I propose the name "guix shell"


However, I feel I have spent enough time and energy on this topic and
I feel a blocking situation so I will move forward to another topic.
:-)

All the best,
simon




This bug report was last modified 2 years and 358 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.