[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: “What’s in a package”
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: “What’s in a package” |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Sep 2021 11:04:36 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hello,
Katherine Cox-Buday <cox.katherine.e@gmail.com> skribis:
> That sounds like a great start. I tossed out some other ideas elsewhere in
> the thread. Most of them involve meta-inspection of the package, Guix
> ecosystem, runtime environment and logs. It would be nice in general to have
> a kind of "agent" that you could run repeatedly over the course of packaging
> that would suggest next steps on ~stderr~ and next logical packaging
> definition on ~stdout~. Kind of like pair-programming with Guix :)
>
> It would perform different operations dependent on what stage in the
> life-cycle the package is at, i.e. ~import~ when no package definition
> exists, build when one does, and possibly running the result in a container
> when the package build succeeds.
>
> E.g. your PyTorch example, starting from scratch (note: ~guix import~ may not
> always feel like the right command to invoke in this example. This may be
> some larger concept than import; also, the example always redirects to
> package.scm for brevity, but the user would probably want to look at it
> first):
>
> #+begin_example
> $ guix import upstream pytorch
>
> stderr: This looks like it might be python package (heuristics.scm:123 -
> package name starts with py), try this instead:
> stdout: guix import upstream pypi pytorch
[...]
I like these ideas!
> etc., etc. Typing that out, it feels dangerously close to Microsoft's Clippy,
> but hopefully more helpful :)
Heh, Clippy was cute. ;-)
> Heuristics, by definition, wouldn't be correct all the time, but this kind of
> thing could help new contributors (or experienced contributors with bad
> memories like me!), and in some cases actually do some of the programming.
>
> And every time someone comes to the mailing list or IRC with a question, we
> can ask ourselves if this is a common question, and maybe create a new
> heuristic.
Agreed.
Let’s see if we can get there…
Thanks,
Ludo’.
- Re: “What’s in a package”, (continued)
- Re: “What’s in a package”, Arun Isaac, 2021/09/21
- Re: “What’s in a package”, Katherine Cox-Buday, 2021/09/21
- Re: [Spam:]Re: “What’s in a package”, Jonathan McHugh, 2021/09/22
- Re: “What’s in a package”, zimoun, 2021/09/22
- Re: “What’s in a package”, Ludovic Courtès, 2021/09/23