From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Reorganizing guix package commands Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:20:05 +0200 Message-ID: <877ffual6i.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874mazi99k.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32831) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asCqK-0000Tk-NJ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:20:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asCqG-0007wO-BO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:20:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <874mazi99k.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Mon, 18 Apr 2016 11:57:59 +0300") 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: Alex Kost Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Alex Kost skribis: > I've just sent a message to bug#22587=C2=B9, but I realized it is better = to > discuss it here in a separate thread. > > So, I think there are inconsistencies in guix commands. For example, we > have "guix system build" to build a system, but "guix build" to build a > package. IMO "guix package build" would be a better choice. > > In general, I think it would be good to move package commands inside > "guix package", e.g, to make "guix package lint", "guix package size", > etc. Why not consider =E2=80=9Cpackage=E2=80=9D to be the default word? :-) I can see how adding =E2=80=9Cpackage=E2=80=9D everywhere helps categorize = things mentally, but as a user interface, I think it would be rather bad. Also, it=E2=80=99s not that simple: =E2=80=9Cguix size=E2=80=9D can take a = store item instead of a package name, =E2=80=9Cguix graph=E2=80=9D cannot do it yet but it would = be useful if it could (=E2=80=9Cguix graph -t references $(readlink -f /run/current-syst= em)=E2=80=9D), etc. I still think that having aliases like =E2=80=9Cguix install=E2=80=9D as An= dy proposed long ago would be useful, though I never started working on it. There are probably other improvements to do around =E2=80=9Cguix package=E2= =80=9D (maybe turning some of its options into separate sub-commands as was suggested before.) All we need is a clear view of where we=E2=80=99re going and patc= hes. :-) > Wouldn't it be great to make some breaking changes? I mean if this or > any other proposal on "guix" command structure is reasonable, I think > it's just the time for it while Guix is still alpha/beta. Otherwise, > the current command structure will never be changed. I agree, now is the right time to break everything! ;-) Ludo=E2=80=99.