On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:13:13AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Tomáš Čech <tc...@suse.cz> skribis:Perhaps we can eventually move to an actual tree structure where the nodes can be named whatever. Until now I thought that's how generations work, and are just named after integers for identification purposes.[...]I’m concerned that this would add both code and user interface complexity for mostly hypothetical use cases. WDYT?Yes, it would surely add some more code and would be demanding for creating good visual represantation for users, but it could also be much closer to behavior user would expect. And that is something which makes tools to be natural to use.I’m not sure. My guess is that an undo-style tree would turn out to be less obvious or more difficult to use. Currently, understanding what’s going on with M-x guix-generations or --list-generations and similar is fairly straightforward.
I'm not using emacs for controling guix at all. But I should start - I can see that is completely different user experience! Thanks! S_W
pgpzWHJqVpxbw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
