Hi Marc,
> - ruby18 = callPackage ../development/interpreters/ruby { };
> - ruby19 = callPackage ../development/interpreters/ruby/ruby-19.nix { };
> - ruby = ruby18;
> + ruby18 = callPackage ../development/interpreters/ruby/ruby-18.nix { };
> + ruby19 = callPackage ../development/interpreters/ruby { };
> + ruby = ruby19
>
> Don't rename files for the sake of renaming unless there is a strong
> reason. If you want to read history or if you have local changes
> applied to those files this kind of renaming is causing a lot of
> additional work for no extra value. So just *don't* do it.
your criticism of Shea's commit is too strong. He changed the default
version of ruby, and the way he renamed those files kept the currently
used naming convention for that expression intact. That is a very
sensible thing to do.
Personally, I would use the file "default.nix" only when there is
exactly one expression of that package. If there are two distinct
versions, then I'd call them 1.8.nix and 1.9.nix, and avoid having
default.nix altogether. I don't feel strongly about that policy, though.
It's a matter of taste, and some packages in Nix use a different scheme.
Take care,
Peter
_______________________________________________
nix-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
