[Bio-packaging] Making the case for GNU Guix ... advice sought

[Ludovic Courtès]

Leo Famulari <leo at famulari.name> skribis:

> On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 04:03:13PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> 
>> Cook, Malcolm <MEC at stowers.org> writes:
>> > + Guix development is open source.  It is open to input from all
>> >   community members.
>> 
>> It’s free software ;)
>> 
>> Maybe it’s also good to mention that you do not need to rely on Guix
>> upstream to add packages.  It is trivial to use custom packages with
>> GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH.
>
> It can't be overstated *how* trivial it is. I've found that users of
> mutable-state package managers just don't believe me when I tell them.
> It's even easy to have out-of-tree packages, pulled in with
> GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH, that depend on in-tree packages or package updates
> that you haven't upstreamed yet.

I’ve been thinking that we should add a “Defining Package Variants”
section beneath or after the “Defining Packages” node in the manual,
showing how to ‘inherit’ from an existing package, etc.

Any takers?  :-)

Ludo’.