From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitri Paduchikh Subject: Re: Distro name Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 03:33:28 +0600 Message-ID: <87sj6jjmmv.fsf@dpaduchikh.invalid> References: <87zk0r8nv4.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46694) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TqVwO-00047N-3M for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 16:33:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TqVwL-0007mr-95 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 16:33:35 -0500 Received: from mail-la0-f45.google.com ([209.85.215.45]:62143) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TqVwL-0007mL-2a for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 16:33:33 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ep20so6741493lab.4 for ; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:33:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87zk0r8nv4.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:02:23 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: bug-guix@gnu.org Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > The (distro ...) name for modules of the distro wasn=E2=80=99t meant to l= ast. > Initially, I thought we could find a name for the distro, and substitute > that name to =E2=80=9Cdistro=E2=80=9D. Possible names: > =E2=80=A2 Jinn, as in =E2=80=9CJinn is not Nixpkgs/NixOS=E2=80=9D; > =E2=80=A2 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. I would propose Guix World as a externally visible name, and just world or distro for internal namespace usage. > However, I=E2=80=99ve come to think that we don=E2=80=99t necessarily nee= d 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? > The obvious solution would be (gnu ...). There=E2=80=99d 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=E2=80=99s 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. ;) --=20 With best regards Dmitri Paduchikh