From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Distro name
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:02:23 +0100
Message-ID: <87zk0r8nv4.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43019)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1TqSeC-0004ux-5o
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:02:40 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1TqSeB-00081C-54
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:02:36 -0500
Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.105]:58789)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1TqSeA-00080v-V4
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 13:02:35 -0500
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=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

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello!

And merry new year!  :-)

The (distro ...) name for modules of the distro wasn=E2=80=99t meant to las=
t.
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).

However, I=E2=80=99ve come to think that we don=E2=80=99t necessarily need =
a separate
name for the distro, but we do need a name for the module name space.

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.

Thoughts?  Ideas?

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlDkdjgACgkQd92V4upS7PRWpQCfUCF0GDlia9hEavl1s3wN4SoM
VIUAmwVIVVzfLzmyIQ/oIIFHk3vp3Gak
=TSh7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--