Hi, I thought about this subject a little more:
> Personally, I'm not particularly fond of stdenv-updates. I've come to realize that I don't mind the stdenv-updates branch per se. The idea that changes to stdenv are staged elsewhere and tested before they're being committed to trunk is fine. Yet, in the past stdenv-updates had a tendency to degenerate, because very few people actually use it. The result is that trunk and stdenv-updates diverge; a situation that is quite unpleasant and causes a lot of problems in its own right, because we effectively end up having two trunks. My suggestion would be to ensure that stdenv-updates is merged back into trunk quickly, say every 2 weeks or so. Holding updates back much longer feels counterproductive. We all have chosen a package manager, Nix, that has the ability to rebuild the entire system whenever a core package changes. I have chosen Nix because I *want* that. So if it happens every now and then that Nix *does* want to rebuild the entire system, then that's fine with me. Take care, Peter _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@cs.uu.nl https://mail.cs.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
