Subject: Re: bug#39575: guix time-machine fails when a tarball was modified in-place

From: zimoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:04:09 +0100

On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 at 15:40, Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Exactly.  But like I wrote above, I don’t think it’s a strong argument.

I agree and the big picture depends on the audience.
Scientific communities would be fine with centralized archives such as
SWH. And only centralized archives IMHO can provide a reliable "long
term" support which is the point for that communities. (Quote because
not clearly defined what it is. :-))
Other communities would prefer distributed archive such as IPFS or
GNUnet but 1. it still needs some work and 2. the "long term" is not
guarantee by nature, IMHO. But it is probably not an issue for that
communities.

> What remains is the issue with ‘content-addressed-item?’, then.

I agree.
The bridge with SWH is in good shape, IMHO.
And the pending IPFS patch would deserve more love. :-) Maybe soon...

Cheers,
simon