> http://sandervanderburg.blogspot.com/2014/04/asynchronous-package-management-with.html
> I have discovered that the Nix expression language is complicated and > difficult to learn. Like Haskell, it has a solid theoretical foundation > and powerful features (such as laziness), but it's too hard to learn by > developers without an academic background. What is this based on? Which is the "async" problem you were faced by using Nix? Thus which problem are you going to solve ? I personally have use cases in mind such as querying a server knowing about all ruby/python/haskell/perl/your-language-X packages - so that we don't need to distribute 50.000 package descriptions (rubyforge case) or similar. But anyway: We have 3 solutions for describing packages: nix, guix, nixjs Thus eventually its time to think about which information could be shared. Who would join a "software version documentation" project allowing people to upload "the most recent version of my software is X, and it requires Z, FOO, BAR" ? Then some nix, nijs, guix packages could be derived automatically (like haskell, ruby, xorg, .. packages). And all the other package systems such as debian could benefit eventually, too. Thoughts? Marc Weber _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev