Hi Ludo, On 2026-06-24 at 11:52+02:00, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > On 2026-06-22 at 17:50+09:00, Nguyễn Gia Phong wrote: > > I analyzed the official channel's dependency graph and it turns out > > [...] if we do 300-dependent cutoffs, we would have 4 "rings" > > going inward of 30722, 1775, 348 and 49 packages > > There are other barriers, having to do mostly with the inconvenience of > synchronizing separate repos compared to a single monorepo, which would > be a real step back IMO.
I hope you'll find the time to read through my wall of text, but TL;DR I'm arguing that the monorepo is currently preventing collaboration on updating packages deep down the dependency graph. Synchronizing the inner channels (49/348/1775 packages) via releases could allow us to calmly fix the breakages together rather than competing for build farm resources: On 2026-06-22 at 17:50+09:00, Nguyễn Gia Phong wrote: > allow changes to land to <ring-i>'s master branch > as long as they don't break their own ring. Any breakage > to their direct dependants on <ring-i+1>'s master > must be filed as an issue proactively. > > This <ring-i+1>'s master however, depends on <ring-i>'s > latest release version-n. Once <ring-i>'s > version-n+1 is out, <ring-i+1>'s master immediately > switch to depend on it and we join hands fixing that branch together. Note that On 2026-06-22 at 17:50+09:00, Nguyễn Gia Phong wrote: > the master branch of any ring is not ready to be consumed > by any user or other channel and the official guix channel's master branch is an alias to the rolling release of the outermost ring. Kind regards, Phong
