From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Kost Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add package definition for GNU XaoS. Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:48:46 +0300 Message-ID: <87egedmtxt.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20151215205144.2b2ff5f1@himbaca> <20151215210203.5d2accca@himbaca> <87wps83rd2.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58570) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aBf6K-0001yx-Fi for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 03:48:53 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aBf6G-0007ny-Ee for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 03:48:52 -0500 Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]:35430) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aBf6G-0007ns-6p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 03:48:48 -0500 Received: by mail-lb0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id bc4so43105037lbc.2 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 00:48:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87wps83rd2.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:42:33 +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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: guix-devel@gnu.org Alex Kost (2015-12-21 15:42 +0300) wrote: > Fabian Harfert (2015-12-15 23:02 +0300) wrote: > > [...] >> @@ -53,6 +54,7 @@ >> #:use-module (gnu packages ghostscript) >> #:use-module (gnu packages glib) >> #:use-module (gnu packages gtk) >> + #:use-module (gnu packages image) > > Our (gnu packages image) module uses (gnu packages maths). I wouldn't > add this circularity, I think it was better to have xaos in a separate > module. But actually I don't know if it's a real issue and what our > policy on such things is. I hope more experienced guix/guile people > will tell if we should avoid such circularities. Sorry for bumping, just to prevent this package from burying in ML. Originally Fabian sent a patch for separate "xaos.scm" file. Then Andreas suggested to move it to "maths.scm". But this will lead to the mentioned circularity: (gnu packages image) already uses (gnu packages maths) and after this patch: (gnu packages maths) will use (gnu packages image). Is it OK to leave it like this, or should 'xaos' be left in a separate file? -- Alex