From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Subject: Re: bioinformatics.scm vs bioconductor.scm ?
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:49:20 +0100
Message-ID: <87lg4mtpqn.fsf@elephly.net>
References: <CAJ3okZ0iRSTReTYVaxOGJXVtasw49XoRRUbQqz_DpHJQNeOL3A@mail.gmail.com>
	<87a7lb5rza.fsf@elephly.net>
	<CAJ3okZ1myBdQNyF1utkP66Ayoky1K8EL=utJsPxqu_vAeQ4+Ow@mail.gmail.com>
	<87y38u52xq.fsf@elephly.net>
	<CAJ3okZ3_4tzHHYO5aEOv=wh7qQnzb_6ZEHe_GvdBTbbpqi+v_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20181218192620.41ec9ad9@alma-ubu>
	<CAJ3okZ0-bE-rxfGYAT03xrw3F+xJPMV7coUhMPk9YNzeBWDxWA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33257)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1gZOBK-0003VR-LM
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:49:45 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1gZOBD-0001H5-CU
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:49:39 -0500
Received: from sender-of-o53.zoho.com ([135.84.80.218]:21755)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1gZOB8-0001B7-EV
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:49:32 -0500
In-reply-to: <CAJ3okZ0-bE-rxfGYAT03xrw3F+xJPMV7coUhMPk9YNzeBWDxWA@mail.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: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Cc: Guix Devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>


zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> Ok, but for example this convention about CRAN is not consistent with
> the importer. :-)
>   guix import cran corpcor -r
> fills the license field with (license gpl3+) and not (license license:gpl=
3+)

That=E2=80=99s right.  The importer does not know where the generated packa=
ge
definition is supposed to be used.

> In other words, why the cran.scm needs a prefix for the license field?

It uses a prefix because we use the =E2=80=9Czlib=E2=80=9D package often, b=
ut not the
=E2=80=9Czlib=E2=80=9D license.  We could exclude the =E2=80=9Czlib=E2=80=
=9D license from (guix
licenses), or import only a specified list of licenses, or we can solve
this naming conflict by prefixing all values from (guix licenses) with
=E2=80=9Clicense:=E2=80=9D (or anything else, really).

Really small modules often don=E2=80=99t have this problem in the first pla=
ce,
so they don=E2=80=99t need to find a solution to work around the naming
conflicts.

--
Ricardo