Re: Using --manfistest with <profile>/manifest files

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> skribis:

> Indeed, that was discussed at length but we still need to reach a
> consensus :)
>
> I personally disagree with the --export-manifest suggestion (which may
> be one of the reasons why this is stalling :p).

Ah, OK.

> Links to the related discussions (lots to read in there!):
>
> - Store channel specification in profile:
>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-11/msg00464.html
>
>   In particular, from there:
>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2020-02/msg00047.html
>
> While I'm at it, Ludo, if you want to continue the discussion, we've
> left it on Feb 25th with this question from me to you:
>
>> I didn't understand from your previous message which downside you find
>> to embedding the specifications.scm file.  It would save efforts to the
>> user and be more systematic, in the sense that it gives a guarantee to
>> the user that a specifications.scm corresponds to a profile.  This last
>> point, I believe, is crucial.

I think there were several issues we discussed:

  1. We can only approximate that actual profile content; storing
     an approximate ‘manifest.scm’ along with the profile would IMO be
     deceptive.

  2. It’s easy to maintain compatibility over a data format, but it’s
     much harder to maintain compatibility for code.

I think we discussed these issues the best we could in the megathread,
so I’m personally in favor of moving forward in a pragmatic way.

Thanks,
Ludo’.