zlacker

>>elikog+(OP)
The main reason for the persistence of Nix despite its warts and general mess is just "first-mover advantage": it was the first, therefore it has more libraries/packages/development of the ecosystem than the alternatives.

Stop being lazy, go back to engineering first principles and it makes little sense to stay with Nix. Guix or any rewrite as a library in a well-developed language* makes more sense.

*For example, why are Haskellians using Nix so much instead of integrating its concepts into their own tooling?

>>aredox+q8
Cabal has had nix-style local builds since 2016:

https://blog.ezyang.com/2016/05/announcing-cabal-new-build-n...

https://cabal.readthedocs.io/en/2.0/nix-local-build-overview...

Also cabal isn't positioned to be a system level package manager. Haskell programmers are the type to want both their application builds and system dependencies to be reproducible and predictable.

> Stop being lazy, go back to engineering first principles and it makes little sense to stay with Nix. Guix or any rewrite as a library in a well-developed language* makes more sense.

Getting Guix packages to be as complete as nixpkgs isn't a matter of laziness though. One person wouldn't be able to do it no matter how disciplined they were.

>>Pareto+O9
You'll also need to deal with project philosophy regarding closed source packages to get Guix as streamlined as Nix.