Tomáš Čech <[email protected]> skribis: >>Perhaps we can eventually move to an actual tree structure where the >>nodes can be named whatever. Until now I thought that's how generations >>work, and are just named after integers for identification purposes.
[...] >>I’m concerned that this would add both code and user interface >>complexity for mostly hypothetical use cases. WDYT? > > Yes, it would surely add some more code and would be demanding for > creating good visual represantation for users, but it could also be > much closer to behavior user would expect. And that is something which > makes tools to be natural to use. I’m not sure. My guess is that an undo-style tree would turn out to be less obvious or more difficult to use. Currently, understanding what’s going on with M-x guix-generations or --list-generations and similar is fairly straightforward. Thanks for your feedback, Ludo’.
