docs(rfc): pixi global proposal

[Hofer-Julian]

Rendered version

[ruben-arts]

Initial review

[wolfv]

Added my thoughts.

[Hofer-Julian]

As discussed, I modified the proposal to feature a more minimalistic version of pixi global.

• Only one package per environment can expose binaries
• Manifest is simpler
• Less room for user error
• It is still possible to install multiple versions of the same package in different environments

[wolfv]

Only one package per environment can expose binaries

This makes certain configurations not work - for example when you have metapackages, like ansible (where the binaries are in the ansible-core dependency).

[wolfv]

Just to expand a bit more on the idea of having multiple (exposed) packages in a single environment. One of the points would be to cover functionality from e.g. homebrew or similar tools.

Especially in the case of python + pip you might want to expose both from the same environemnt, so that you can use the single python version to also create new virtual environments. Same goes for python + uv etc.

I do see a use case for this.

But since the TOML format as envisioned here would be easily extended to accomodate multiple packages in that section, I think we can get started.

[Hofer-Julian]

But since the TOML format as envisioned here would be easily extended to accomodate multiple packages in that section, I think we can get started.

I don't think it makes sense to go for the proposal as is, if we already expect that we need multiple top-level packages that are allowed to expose binaries. In that case, I would go back to the former state, which didn't make the distinction between injected and package

[Hofer-Julian]

I've made a new commit which removes the distinction between injected and package. I also tried to address as many comments as possible on the former proposal.

[nichmor]

awesome job! ❤️