Andy Wingo <wi...@igalia.com> skribis: > On Fri 14 Apr 2017 14:54, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >>> I think we should make it so that the lower-potluck-package process >>> prefers "core" packages if available, and only goes to the channel if >>> the core does not provide a package matching the specification. >>> >>> I think this is a question for the design of channels though: how to >>> resolve dynamically scoped (specification->package) links in the >>> presence of channels. >> >> ‘specification->package’ already transparently handles things in >> GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH, so I suspect it wouldn’t be very different. >> >> WDYT? > > I don't know. I see a danger if person A makes a potluck package for > that depends on Guile, and person B makes a potluck package for some > development version of Guile with a later version number. Person A (and > person A's users) probably don't expect to be using a development > Guile, so the specifications in person A's package should probably *not* > resolve person B's guile as the "best" one. See what I'm saying? > Tricky stuff. A hierarchy of potential sources sounds best to me so > that specification->package only looks for "guile" in the potluck > GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH if it's not found (possibly with the version > constraint) in the "main" GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH.
Indeed, good point. We should have a way to say that some channels have precedence over other channels. Ludo’.
