Thanks so much Kristiyan and Mathieu! I'm really grateful to be able to
use Guix's clojure-tools again.
Ben
On 12/2/26 09:04, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
Hello Kristiyan,
Your contribution has been merged on master. We should finally have a
fully functional ‘clojure-tools’ package.
For now we still need to explicitly install clojure-tools, openjdk:jdk,
coreutils and optionally rlwrap. I have tried to make OpenJDK and
Coreutils proper package inputs but there was an issue when using
cider-repl. I am currently investigating that issue.
Regards,
Mathieu
Kristiyan Kanchev <[email protected]> writes:
No, I don't mind at all. Thank you for helping me out.
//
On Tue, Feb 3, 2026, 12:40 Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
I am fine with that incremental approach.
If you don't mind, in order to make the job of the committer as easy as
possible, I will gather your patches into a PR on codeberg.
Thank you,
Mathieu Lirzin
Kristiyan Kanchev <[email protected]> writes:
> Hello,
> Sorry for the delayed response, I'm on FOSDEM now but unfortunately, I
won't be abe to attend Guix Days.
> I think the best route is to merge my patches as is and then open a new PR
on codeberg updating only the resolver.
> I'm absolutely sure that resolver 1.6 is enough for clojure to function
properly, but also agree with your remarks that 1.8 would
be even
> better. However, I don't think maven-resolver 1.8 is ported on Guix now, so
this would involve some more porting and it's better
to
> tackle this in a future PR. What do you think?
>
> //
>
> On Sun, Feb 1, 2026, 20:10 Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Kristiyan,
>
> Do you agree with the rationale for making clojure-tools-deps depend on
> maven-resolver 1.8.2 instead of 1.6.3 ?
>
> Given your understandeable dishartenment, Are you still interested in
> giving a second shot by opening PR on codeberg containing the updated
> package definition ?
>
> Since dependency resolution problem is forcing me to fallback on using
> ‘clojure-tools-bin’ from nonguix which is frustrating, I am willing to
> take the burden of opening the PR and pinging people on IRC until some
> committer gets to merge it, if you prefer.
>
> What is more comfortable to you ?
>
> Mathieu
>
> Ben Sturmfels <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Mathieu Lirzin <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> My recommandation is similar to what Kristiyan has done. I am
> >> perfectly
> >> fine with the usage of maven-3.8-core as input to clojure-tools-deps
> >> package. However as you suggested I am in favour of depending on
> >> maven-resolver-1.8 instead of maven-resolver-1.6 because this is
> >> safer
> >> to depends on a minor version that matches what is distributed in
> >> the
> >> upstream clojure-tools bundle JAR.
> >
> > Thanks. I'm no expert in analysing JAR files, but upstream
> > clojure-tools does appear to be depending on maven-resolver 1.8. The
> > linux-install.sh fetches
> >
https://github.com/clojure/brew-install/releases/download/1.12.4.1602/clojure-tools-1.12.4.1602.tar.gz
> > which installs the included
> > clojure-tools/clojure-tools-1.12.4.1602.jar. That JAR has
> >
META-INF/maven/org.apache.maven.resolver/maven-resolver-api/pom.properties,
> > which lists:
> >
> > artifactId=maven-resolver-api
> > groupId=org.apache.maven.resolver
> > version=1.8.2
> >
> > Same for the include JAR in Guix's very slightly older version
> > 1.12.4.1582.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ben
> >
>
