-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update the docs for prioritize #312
Conversation
I've written the docs with focus on a new user that implements a dependency provider for the first time rather than with a focus on exact definitions.
src/solver.rs
Outdated
/// Decisions are always made for the highest priority package first. The order of decisions | ||
/// determines which solution is chosen and can drastically change the performances of the | ||
/// solver. If there is a conflict between two package versions, the package with the higher | ||
/// priority is preserved and the lower priority gets discarded. Usually, you want to decide |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If there is a conflict between two package versions, the priority is preserved and the lower priority gets discarded.
I'm not following. What scenario are you trying to describe?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added the word "decision".
Say:
choose A
decide A 2
choose B
decide B 2
and then we discover A 2 -> C 1, B 2 -> C 2.
In this case, we will next try B 1, not A 1: The version of A 2 gets preserved, while B 2 gets discarded.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps: "If there is a conflict between two package versions, decisions will be backtracked until the lower priority package version is discarded preserving the higher priority package." or something.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me, but @mpizenberg is our master wordsmith.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It’s fine by me
I've written the docs with focus on a new user that implements a dependency provider for the first time rather than with a focus on exact definitions.