Re: [PATCH] emacs: Add 'pretty-sha-path'.

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès (2014-11-05 23:12 +0300) wrote:
>
>> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>>
>>> Ludovic Courtès (2014-11-05 00:37 +0300) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
>>>>
>>>>> Also I forgot to mention “emacs/guix-messages.el” in “emacs.am” in
>>>>> commit 62f261d, so I did it in this patch (I hope it's not too evil :-))
>>>>
>>>> Maybe “evil” is too strong a word ;-), but please keep the
>>>> emacs/guix-messages.el addition in a separate commit.
>>>>
>>>> Commits are cheap and easy, so let’s favor clarity.
>>>
>>> Yes, cheap, I know, but not very easy for me as I never sure what to
>>> write in a commit message and I have to ask guix-devel even about such
>>> trivial changes (the patch is attached :-)).
>>
>> Per ‘HACKING’ ;-), you don’t *have* to ask for trivial changes.  It’s
>> nice of you to do it, but you don’t have to.
>
> Yes, I know, I meant I'm not sure if my commit messages will be
> appropriate.

Oh, I see.  I think it’s not all good-or-bad, and it’s not the end of
the world if the commit message isn’t perfect.  So we must make some
efforts to achieve consistency and follow our own guidelines, but that
must not block the more important effort of developing the software.

>>> I've realized that "pretty-sha-path" is a bad name, because those 32
>>> numbers and letters have nothing to do with SHA-sequences as I thought
>>> initially.  So maybe it would be better to rename it into
>>> "pretty-hash-path" or "guix-pretty-path" (as it will be a part of Guix)
>>> or something else.  Or is it OK to leave it as it is?
>>
>> Good point.  Prefixing with ‘guix-’ makes sense, and it will be easier
>> for users to find it.
>>
>> While we’re at it, “path” in GNU normally means “search path”, not “file
>> name” (info "(standards) GNU Manuals"), so perhaps
>> ‘guix-pretty-file-names’ or something like that would be even better.
>> WDYT?
>
> I think ‘guix-pretty-file-names’ is too long for a package name as all
> symbols have to be prefixed with it.  What about ‘guix-prettify’?

OK!

Ludo’.