From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: We need an RFC procedure [Re: Services can now have a default value] Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 00:55:41 +0200 Message-ID: <87pog4gihe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87shl9qo7h.fsf@gnu.org> <877f2go3wn.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <877f2gksbs.fsf@gnu.org> <8737d32abz.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <87bmrr4ghh.fsf@gnu.org> <874lxjnzyx.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <87bmrp8lk6.fsf@gnu.org> <8737d1nxbd.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> <20170422004634.4oedqmsebpctjqk4@abyayala> <878tmsud8m.fsf@elephly.net> <20170422100811.mr3t5rgh6n44xvdk@abyayala> 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]:56880) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d23wR-0004Lr-6z for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Apr 2017 18:55:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d23wO-0004x4-5t for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Apr 2017 18:55:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170422100811.mr3t5rgh6n44xvdk@abyayala> (ng0's message of "Sat, 22 Apr 2017 10:08:11 +0000") 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: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel , Carlo Zancanaro Hi ng0, ng0 skribis: > Let's take this thread, starting at > "https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2017-04/msg00329.html". > Ludovic worked on something, pushed it, did some changes to the relevant > documentation but further examples in the documentation which are now > affected weren't fixed with the push. We spent time answering questions > about broken configurations, assuming everyone who uses GuixSD now and > in the future has a fairly competent knowledge of Guile, explaining chang= es > which could have been avoided - or at least reduced in frequency of quest= ions > asked - by changing examples. I think there=E2=80=99s a misunderstanding. This change is what started the discussion we=E2=80=99re having with Carlo, but it is a compatible change: GuixSD configs that previously worked still do. Thus I don=E2=80=99t think anyone spent time =E2=80=9Canswering questions a= bout broken configurations=E2=80=9D in this case. For the same reason, examples in the= doc that were valid before are still valid after the change. > If Ludovic would've presented this change before applying it, it would've > been one of the obvious problems: don't just document the change, change > further documentation sections which rely on this. This way we don't have > a documentation which presents people examples but contradicts itself lat= er > on. What part of the documentation contradicts itself? I=E2=80=99m confused. As for posting the change before applying it, I should do more of that. I=E2=80=99ve taken the bad habit of pushing what I consider as =E2=80=9Csim= ple=E2=80=9D changes directly to the repo, but perhaps the criteria should be reconsidered. :-) Thoughts? Ludo=E2=80=99.