On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Tomasz Czyż <tomasz.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you sure that having multiple tools/solutions is frustrating? Maybe > it's just lack of description or documentation? > (btw, currently there is only one, Sander is trying to introduce second > "official" one if I understand situation correctly). > Actually, I think that in this case, two separate tools might be called for. For dealing with the craziness that is npm, I see two approaches. One is the nix-centric approach of the existing npm2nix: each package gets its own derivation, and dependencies are symlinked into the node_modules directory. That's simple fits most closely with the way native nix packages work. The main problem with this is that npm does "clever" things to work around problems with its design, and some npm packages have undeclared dependencies that only work because of the quirks of npm. These packages are fairly rare, but they do crop up from time to time. The other approach is more npm-centric. The idea is to mimic the quirks of npm as exactly as possible, so that all packages find themselves in exactly the environment they expect. This leads to other problems, such as slower execution and bloated derivations. So it might actually be a good idea to have two different tools, each of which make different engineering tradeoffs. Colin
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev