<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px">* What is your evaluation of the proposal?</span><div>+1<br style="font-size:12.800000190734863px"><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px">* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to the Swift Package Manager?</span></div><div>Yes, pinning was fairly confusing to reason about</div><div><br style="font-size:12.800000190734863px"><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px">* Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?</span></div><div>I think so.</div><div><br><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px">* If you have used other languages, libraries, or package managers with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?</span></div><div>This fits in pretty well. It isn't a huge deviation.</div><div><br style="font-size:12.800000190734863px"><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px">* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?</span><br></div><div><span style="font-size:12.800000190734863px">A quick reading.</span></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:55 AM, Martin Waitz via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">> * What is your evaluation of the proposal?<br>
<br>
</span>I’m in favour of this proposal.<br>
It solves the problems I have with the current behaviour of the swift package manager.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to the Swift Package Manager?<br>
<br>
</span>yes.<br>
While the existing auto-pinning feature can be used to get reproducible dependency versions,<br>
it has some deficiencies which make it more complicated than required for the common cases without really solving the more exotic use cases.<br>
Package pinning vs. requiring a specific revision in Package.swift also felt like two overlapping features without a clear motivation for one versus the other.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?<br>
<br>
</span>yes.<br>
It focuses on doing one thing well without precluding other user use cases.<br>
The new behaviour defaults does the right thing(TM) for the common use cases and is easily explained.<br>
Especially now that we are already able to require specific versions within Package.swift, SE-0150+SE-0175 provide a nice set of orthogonal features.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> * If you have used other languages, libraries, or package managers with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?<br>
<br>
</span>Never used a package manager with this kind of dependency resolution and always wanted to have one.<br>
<span class=""><br>
> * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?<br>
<br>
</span>Took part in the discussions for SE-0145 and now read SE-0175.<br>
<br>
—<br>
Martin<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/swift-<wbr>evolution</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>