From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Brett Gilio <brettg@posteo.net>
Subject: Re: Should we rename qtoctave to octave and octave to octave-cli?
	(was Re: Octave & QtOctave)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2018 09:49:34 -0600
Message-ID: <877eh1gnsh.fsf@posteo.net>
References: <875zwnqomz.fsf@posteo.net> <87a7lyzkk2.fsf@gmail.com>
	<20181124221022.ankjuz4mdpkoohkn@abyayala>
	<87o9ad2qly.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47480)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1gQwfG-0006uc-Ab
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 10:49:43 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1gQwfD-0003YH-6Z
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 10:49:42 -0500
Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:33843)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1gQwfD-0003Xu-0a
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 10:49:39 -0500
Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130])
	by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAA332400FB
	for <guix-devel@gnu.org>; Sun, 25 Nov 2018 16:49:37 +0100 (CET)
In-reply-to: <87o9ad2qly.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Alex Vong <alexvong1995@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>


Alex Vong writes:

> ng0@n0.is writes:
>
>> names for packages are (mostly) random, although in some
>> cases following classiifcations (see python-*, r-*, ...).
>>
> I am thinking that should we rename qtoctave to octave and octave to
> octave-cli (or octave-minimal)?
>
> Firstly, a new user wanting to install octave will probably do the
> obvious "guix package -i octave", but currently this command will do the
> counter-intuitive thing of installing the non-gui version of
> octave. Instead, they will have to install qtoctave to get the gui. I am
> in favour of making a package to support as many features as possible,
> while also making a minimal version for building other packages (or
> users who desn't want a gui). An example would be emacs vs
> emacs-minimal.
>
> Secondly, I suggest to name the minimal version as "octave-cli" because
> this is what the octave binary (the command-line only version) is
> called. Also, running "guix package -A '-cli$'" shows some of the
> existing packages also follow similar naming convention (I don't know it
> they have a corresponding gui version though).
>
> What do others think?
>
> Cheers,
> Alex

I am in favor of this idea:
Octave && Octave Minimal

Brett