Re: Services can now have a default value

[ng0 <contact.ng0@cryptolab.net>]

Carlo Zancanaro transcribed 1.7K bytes:
> I have a question related to this, but about a broader issue.
> 
> On Sat, Apr 15 2017, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> >   (service openssh-service-type)
> 
> Is this supposed to be the preferred way to add a service to your
> operating system? Or, put another way, as a service writer: should I
> consider a *-service-type to be sufficient to complete the work of
> creating a service?
> 
> Looking at various services that we have defined at the moment
> (according to what is documented), most services have a procedure (ie.
> *-service), and maybe also a *-service-type. For example, in "Database
> Services" we have postgresql-service and mysql-service, with no
> corresponding *-service-type. But then we have redis-service-type
> without a *-service to go with it.
> 
> I wonder if we would be better off creating *-service procedures for
> each *-service-type and documenting them as the canonical way to create
> services. That way we could handle things like default arguments through
> the usual scheme mechanisms, rather than our own special case.
> 
> Carlo

Yeah I fully agree and sympathize with the need for a canonical
way to create services.
In packages, we habe some kind of framework (with some expectations),
with system-services it is currently as free as it gets in freedom
of expression.
Which is both good and confusing to get started with.

-- 
PGP and more: https://people.pragmatique.xyz/ng0/