On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:13:13AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >Tomáš Čech skribis: > >>>Perhaps we can eventually move to an actual tree structure where the >>>nodes can be named whatever. Until now I thought that's how generations >>>work, and are just named after integers for identification purposes. > >[...] > >>>I’m concerned that this would add both code and user interface >>>complexity for mostly hypothetical use cases. WDYT? >> >> Yes, it would surely add some more code and would be demanding for >> creating good visual represantation for users, but it could also be >> much closer to behavior user would expect. And that is something which >> makes tools to be natural to use. > >I’m not sure. My guess is that an undo-style tree would turn out to be >less obvious or more difficult to use. > >Currently, understanding what’s going on with M-x guix-generations or >--list-generations and similar is fairly straightforward. I'm not using emacs for controling guix at all. But I should start - I can see that is completely different user experience! Thanks! S_W