From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: myglc2 Subject: Re: Reorganizing guix package commands Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:51:33 -0400 Message-ID: <86oa95yae2.fsf@gmail.com> References: <874mazi99k.fsf@gmail.com> <877ffual6i.fsf@gnu.org> <86bn56ziw9.fsf@gmail.com> <20160419051701.GA10275@jocasta.intra> <86y489ycwr.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32808) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asW58-0004Pf-1f for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:52:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asW53-0003gC-UE for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:52:45 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:35494) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asW53-0003ff-DS for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:52:41 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1asW4w-00040U-KG for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:52:39 +0200 Received: from c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([73.167.118.254]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:52:29 +0200 Received: from myglc2 by c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:52:29 +0200 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: guix-devel@gnu.org "Thompson, David" writes: > I'm with Ricardo. Separating things into things for "users" and > things for "developers" just re-establishes the dichotomy that we > intend to blur, and insist isn't really there in the first place. We > want to encourage users to hack the system, not cordon off a section > of tools and say "these aren't for you." On this point you Guix developers are so didactic that you run a real risk of making Guix adoption self-limiting :-( And you misunderstand what I am proposing. Instead I am saying that restructuring the interface can make it easier for a novice to find their way in. Once this novice is using Guix, the same structuring will help them find and use other parts of Guix. This actually advances your objective because it brings more potential "system hackers" into the user base. How is this bad?