On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 08:44:44PM +0200, Danny Milosavljevic wrote:
> Ideally, a successful build & installation of a package should look
> like this:
> 
> $ guix package -i foobar
> $ 

Silence is golden!

> Nothing else.  If you can't help it, then:
> 
> $ guix package -i foobar
> Package foobar in version 2.3.2 has been successfully installed into your profile.
> $ 

[...]

> For a successful installation it should *never* print (as it does now):
> 
> $ guix package -i foobar
> ...aphics/opentype -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/graphics/transforms -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/mediastream -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/mediastream/libwebrtc -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/mock -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/mock/mediasource -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/network -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/sql -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/text -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/platform/text/icu -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/Source/WebCore/plugins -I/tmp/guix-build-webkitgtk-2.16.3.drv-0/webkitgtk-2.16.3/

This sample omits the most useful output, which is the summary of what
will be done. In my opinion, a successful run of `guix package` should
either print this summary and the name of the new generation, or be as
verbose as it is now.

> I think that a line containing something like
> "36pqsgbqi7kkkkn89sqrp2hyk3gxm8zv" (like install-file would print,
> too) should never appear in front of the user in normal operation.
> 
Perhaps for `guix package`, but I disagree for `guix build` and others.
It prints *only* the new store items on stdout, and this makes it very
easy to compose Guix commands. We should not break this.

> Some programmer (!) colleagues of mine actually remarked something
> like "what is THAT? Looks scary" when they looked at what guix prints
> when I install something in Guix.

I understand that your colleagues share your opinion, but they are few,
and don't even use Guix, so we should not take this small sample too
seriously. We can all look at the interfaces of software or machines
that we don't use and feel confused, but this feeling doesn't mean very
much, in my opinion. I remember being mystified by car dashboards as
child. Since I learned to drive, I never think twice about them, and I
drive different cars and trucks often.

Command-line interfaces are not suitable for usage by "non-technical
users" anyways; they demand a GUI. Most of us are comfortable on the
command-line, but we should not forget that we are in an extremely small
minority. It would be great if everyone could learn to use their
computers with the command-line, which offers great power and
flexibility, but it's not a realistic goal, especially as new computer
users eschew "real" computers in favor of mobile phones.

So, I'm wary of sacrificing a flexible and powerful CLI on behalf of
users who really will never use a CLI. Now, I'm not saying there is
nothing to improve. Rather, I'm saying that the existing Guix CLI is
pretty good, and we should be careful about changing it.