[Nix-dev] Re: Why stdenv-updates branch?

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello,

Peter Simons <simons at cryp.to> writes:

> 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.
[...]

As you point out, I think it's important to have a staging area, at
least to make sure changes in components close to the root of the
dependency graph (libc, compiler, etc.) still allow us to at the very
least build the most important applications.

> 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.

IMO 2 weeks is still two short; I'd vote for a month at least.  This
time frame has to be just as long to provide the opportunity to
aggregate several changes to core components, but not too long to be
convenient.

The reason is that it takes a lot of time, storage space, and CPU power
to perform full upgrades.  It's always annoying when you just want to
make a simple change (e.g., enabling a new service in
`configuration.nix') and you find yourself re-downloading/building the
whole world while the operation could have taken just a few seconds.

Thanks,
Ludo'.