Re: Distro name

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Dmitri Paduchikh <dpaduchikh@gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
>> The (distro ...) name for modules of the distro wasn’t meant to last.
>> Initially, I thought we could find a name for the distro, and substitute
>> that name to “distro”.  Possible names:
>
>>   • Jinn, as in “Jinn is not Nixpkgs/NixOS”;
>>   • Guixotic, as Guix + Exotic (suggested by RMS).
>
> These seem rather baroque to me. Especially the reference to nixpkgs in
> such a context. The name "Unix" is pretty much widespread so the
> abbreviation "GNU" can be seen as ingenious. nixpkgs is much less known
> and hence this looks weird, IMHO.

Right, but the meaning doesn’t have to be explained all the time,
esp. since jinn is also a noun.

> I would propose Guix World as a externally visible name, and just world
> or distro for internal namespace usage.

Hmm.

>> However, I’ve come to think that we don’t necessarily need a separate
>> name for the distro, but we do need a name for the module name space.
>
> It would be good to have name for distro. How would you refer to it
> otherwise?

Guix?

>> The obvious solution would be (gnu ...).  There’d be modules like
>> (gnu packages openssl), which does not mean that OpenSSL is a GNU
>> package, but I think that should be clear in this context.  Anyway,
>> that’s the option that I like the most currently.
>
> It may be clear, but your example demonstrates internal inconsistency of
> such naming. Is Guix intended for GNU software only? If not, then be
> fair to all the others. ;)

The Guile module name space is different from the actual software names,
so I’m not too worried actually.

Thanks for your feedback!

Ludo’.