[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?
From: |
Leo Famulari |
Subject: |
Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages? |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Sep 2021 13:08:06 -0400 |
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 12:57:23PM -0700, Sarah Morgensen wrote:
> I do not have a specific solution in mind, but I think there must be
> one. I do have a few half-baked ideas, but I'm curious what we can all
> come up with together. Or maybe you'll just tell me I'm just being
> awfully picky :)
Thanks for starting this discussion. In order to avoid repeating /
rediscovering the reasons why the current idiom was chosen, I recommend
reading the discussion that led to it:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-01/msg00335.html
- Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, (continued)
- Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/09/01
- Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2021/09/01
- Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Maxime Devos, 2021/09/02
- Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/09/02
- Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2021/09/02
Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?,
Leo Famulari <=
Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Sarah Morgensen, 2021/09/03
Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Sarah Morgensen, 2021/09/03
Re: Can we find a better idiom for unversioned packages?, Ludovic Courtès, 2021/09/08