From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: [PATCH] ui: 'package->recutils' serializes the source field. Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 18:42:36 +0200 Message-ID: <87ziojb6kj.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87a8gog154.fsf@gnu.org> <87vazcce0a.fsf@gnu.org> <87r39zcfkz.fsf@gnu.org> <871t1zoz98.fsf@gmail.com> <87invbc6hn.fsf@gnu.org> <87ziombyrx.fsf@gnu.org> <87popglv3u.fsf@gnu.org> <87lh04ltg2.fsf@gnu.org> <32ade0cc-b971-a3fa-ea92-9b313955a373@uq.edu.au> <4e35f009-ba71-f430-65e6-e986365b0c77@uq.edu.au> <87twesd9jw.fsf@elephly.net> <87k2fnz7zl.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49018) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXt4D-0003Ci-Jj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:42:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXt48-0000OC-Hq for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:42:48 -0400 Received: from sender163-mail.zoho.com ([74.201.84.163]:24361) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXt48-0000Ny-81 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:42:44 -0400 In-reply-to: <87k2fnz7zl.fsf@gmail.com> 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: Alex Kost Cc: guix-devel , David Craven Alex Kost writes: > David Craven (2016-08-10 17:13 +0300) wrote: > >>> Even so, if one insisted on using the recutils output in a programmatic >>> fashion (e.g. in a bash script), it would be best to run “guix build >>> --source” on the package names to obtain the actual source tarballs that >>> are used by Guix. >> >> I don't disagree. Alex what do you think? > > Do you mean about your original proposal? I am for it: I don't > comprehend why the source URL can't be displayed (especially since a > user can easily find it anyway), but I don't understand FSDG well enough > to judge, so I prefer not to participate in this discussion. I have previously stated that I’m not convinced that we really need a serialisation of the “source” field in the user-facing recutils output. The patch was a welcome demonstration of how this feature would look like. As to the question about whether printing the plain upstream source URLs has FSDG implications I suggest that those who think that this change would be an improvement bring it up for discussion on the gnu-linux-libre mailing list, as we don’t want to ignore the concerns brought up by Mathieu and Mark. > (I hope this thread will not tear Guix contributors apart) It won’t :) I think it’s obvious that there has been some miscommunication in this thread. We may be able to avoid this in the future if everyone made a conscious effort at being courteous when writing and tolerant when reading. It is easy to miscommunicate in a textual medium. ~~ Ricardo