Hi, On February 19, 2026 4:17:17 PM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Courtès" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >Tomas Volf <[email protected]> skribis: > >> So, the question is, do we want some rules for the naming and versioning >> of the packages (e.g., $pkg is any *released* version, and $pkg-next is >> *any* version, often newer, possibly git snapshot or a release >> candidate)? Or do you feel this would be governance overreach, it >> should stay strictly up to the packagers and we should just document >> that users who do not want release candidates should just always pin >> versions of everything? > >I think the spirit was that “-next” (as a package name) was for >unreleased versions or version control snapshots; good examples of this >are ‘guile-next’ and ‘emacs-next’. > >For released versions, we should keep the name unchanged IMO. Examples: >[email protected], gcc-toolchain@15, openmpi@5, [email protected], etc.
But then consider `guix shell python python-numpy`. That will not work. It might be quite nonintuitive. So I am not sure it can be so simple. Rutherther > >Ludo’.
