<zimoun>rekado, I agree on the general arguments. I disagree on concrete implementation. :-) Say “you can use Guix on Mac via Docker” means for my audience: the solution is Docker.
<zimoun>civodul, I agree from the Guix side. I disagree from the Guix for Science side. Say “Guix does not on Mac but only on Linux” means for my audience: Guix is only for cluster, so I do not care. Let drop that and focus on my work so I use Conda. Scientific reproduducibility is another level of priority.
<dstolfa>zimoun: i feel like "solution is docker with guix on top of it" is better than "solution is conda on macos"
<zimoun>this discussion is applying «The Right Thing» and not the «Worse is better». And as history demonstrates: more success with the «Worse is better» than «The Right Thing».
<zimoun>dstolfa: Who produces this Docker image? Size of this Docker image? etc. vs “bash conda-install.sh” then light use. If Guix with Docker had been the solution for foreign distros, I will not be there. ;-)
<zimoun>efraim: yeah, I gave a look to Julia Documenter but it is too much for me.
<zimoun>Well, I will not work on porting Guix on Mac or Windows. Talk is cheap. :-) The point I *really* want to make: Guix for Science should not neglect these 2 platforms because it is today the large majority in Science. So what do we do for stretching them to what we consider «The Right Thing» (at least about reproducibility)?
<efraim>I was going to ask about needing privileged mode for the extra build users
<zimoun>For sure, I will not work daily on Guix on Docker. Using Docker is fine once all is ready but not when as a researcher you are interactively experimenting: install that, try that, remove that, run, fix, re-run, etc.
<zimoun>To me, Guix on Docker is the same solution as ‘relocatable’.
<efraim>Is that something they do in docker? I like the 'insert this directory over there' aspect of it, so I guess you could experiment with it, then edit your docker file and spin that up again later