From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brett Gilio Subject: Re: bug#38529: Make --ad-hoc the default for guix environment proposed deprecation mechanism Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:22:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4ee893ad-b489-4e98-b716-e418cd3b8049@localhost> References: <87eexeu8mo.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87k16vdise.fsf@gnu.org> <87pngncc0n.fsf@kyleam.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54701) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDjz-0001AN-GN for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:22:24 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDjy-00045a-GJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:22:23 -0500 Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:33239) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDjy-00041n-AF for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:22:22 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F151216005F for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 15:22:19 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <87pngncc0n.fsf@kyleam.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Kyle Meyer Cc: Guix-devel , 38529@debbugs.gnu.org Dec 17, 2019 7:34:17 AM Kyle Meyer : > G=E1bor Boskovits writes: > > > > Konrad Hinsen ezt =EDrta (id?pont: 2019. dec. > > 17., Ke 7:52): > > > [...] > > > > > > How about a more drastic measure: deprecate "guix environment" and > > > introduce a new subcommand with the desired new behaviour? > > > > > > > > That is also the other option I was thinking about. Do you have any goo= d > > idea in mind as how to call it? Of course the classic guix environment2 > > comes to my mind, but it does not look very appealing to me. > > > > Perhaps "guix env"? > +1 for guix env