Re: [RFC] A simple draft for channels

[Oleg Pykhalov <go.wigust@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1098 bytes --]

myglc2@gmail.com writes:

[...]

> I don't think you should call them "channels." Why? Only advanced Nix or
> Conda users will know what it means.  For anyone familiar with Chrome,
> Red Hat, or TV channels, the "channels" label works against you: they
> have to learn and remember that a Guix channel works differently. These
> labels might work better: "Guix Sources" (ala Debian sources list[1]),
> "third party sources" or "third party repos".
>
> WDYT?
>
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/SourcesList

"Sources" is a very bad name.  Especially for search engines.  And it
also bad for the reference.  You will need to specify what is the 'Guix
source' all the time you mention it.  I think about '~/src/guix' Git
repository as I see this.

I think the best for understand phrase is a "third party package
repository" or "package repositories" for short.  Is it too general or
could we stick with it?

I also like Ricardo's mention 'Guix package collection' on the IRC.
Maybe 'Guix collections' will be a good candidate?  It's unique unlike
'package repositories', which is good for search.

Oleg.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]