Am Dienstag, dem 09.01.2024 um 12:10 +0100 schrieb Vivien Kraus: > Dear Guix, > > [...] I know that a bunch of packages have reasons not to exist in Guix, I simply wanted to point out that we don't have them.
> > I think we should settle on what to do with the gnome package soon > > to not stall the branch even further. We can already start working > > towards GNOME 46 after the merge :) > In my opinion, we should have atkmm:2.28.3, but I see atkmm-2.28 > being used as a propagated-inputs for gtkmm-3, and gtkmm-3 is an > input for inkscape. That’s a world rebuild… > > For Cantarell fonts, maybe we should point to the latest commit? > That’s another world rebuild though, and for very little gain as of > now. > > I’m not sure a flatpak-only gnome software is a hard requirement. It > would be most confusing. Gnome-tour is nice, but I think we can live > without it until we figure out this “rust” stuff. With "the gnome package" I mean the gnome metapackage that made you raise this issue. > > There is some gnome-adjacent software (particularly extensions, I > > don't want all of them to break like they did the last time and the > > time before) to have a look at as well before the merge > > You mean, the gnome-shell-extension-* in (gnu packages gnome-xyz)? I > don’t use them (I was told they were frequently broken so I never > bothered to try them!) so I’m not sure I can reliably tell whether > they work correctly. They tend to get broken with each gnome update, but I'm here to change that. Testing them is actually quite simple: construct a guix system vm with a gnome that has all the extensions, run it, then enable all of them one by one in the GUI. If there's a version incompatibility, you will notice. Cheers