[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Parameterized packages
From: |
Pierre Neidhardt |
Subject: |
Re: Parameterized packages |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Jan 2020 11:17:03 +0100 |
Hi John,
I believe the complexity will remain under control.
"Flags" are not replacing Scheme: they are Scheme. Just like we have
support for multiple outputs now.
For newcomers, package parameters are not an issue since they are
completely optional. You won't see them until you want them!
Regarding the command line: maybe we don't have to update it after all.
We could stick to manifests and scripts to leverage package parameters.
Thoughts on this, everyone?
--
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: Parameterized packages, (continued)
- Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/22
- Re: Parameterized packages, zimoun, 2020/01/22
- Re: Parameterized packages, ison, 2020/01/24
- Re: Parameterized packages, zimoun, 2020/01/26
- Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/27
- Re: Parameterized packages, zimoun, 2020/01/27
- Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/27
- Re: Parameterized packages, zimoun, 2020/01/27
- Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/27
- Re: Parameterized packages, John Soo, 2020/01/25
- Re: Parameterized packages,
Pierre Neidhardt <=
- Re: Parameterized packages, zimoun, 2020/01/20
- Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/17
- Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/15
Re: Parameterized packages, Pierre Neidhardt, 2020/01/15