George Clemmer <myglc2@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2018. aug. 30., Cs,
21:14):

>
> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:
>
> > Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I think “Guix System” is OK.
> >
> > I think so too.
>
> I recommend against renaming GuixSD >> "Guix System". Here is Why:
>
> 1) A noob would expect "guix system" to refer to the whole Guix
> enchilada. If we use it to refer to GuixSD, a specific Guix deployment
> mode, we have created a new, counter-intuitive thing we have to explain.
>
> 2) As Ricardo points out below, the "guix system" command clashes with
> this use of Guix system. This is a second counter-intuitive thing we
> would have to explain.
>
> Bottom line: we shouln'd use the general term "Guix System" in any way
> beyond, perhaps in a descriptway way, e.g., The Guix project develops
> the Guix System, a set of tools that manage software environments.
>
> >> Most of the time we’ll just say “Guix”, as
> >> is already the case, and when we need to disambiguate (for instance when
> >> addressing bugs), we’ll ask “Are you using Guix System?” or “Are you
> >> using the Guix distro?”, and everything will be fine.  :-)
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> > I wrote this on IRC:
> >
> > The name “GuixSD” is opaque and creates an arbitrary distinction between
> > the system running on bare metal and the systems you can create with the
> > “guix system” commands.  It makes it difficult to communicate about
> > Guix.  Do we really offer “a package manager” and a “distro” — or is it
> > really all one thing with various levels?
> >
> > The “guix system” command can be used without GuixSD to create Guix
> > virtual machines or containers.  Describing “guix system” is difficult
> > when we think in terms of “package manager” vs “distro”.  Guix itself is
> > also a distro – none of the packages it provides link with the host
> > system, and the collection of packages is a distribution of free
> > software.
> >
> > I think that simplifying the name by using “guix” as a category will
> > make communication easier.
> >
> >> The motivation for this name change is that “SD” is obscure to most, as
> >> you note, plus it creates confusion when people visit the web site: the
> >> web site has a “GuixSD” logo, but then it talks about features of the
> >> package manager.  Designating the whole tool set as “Guix” will simplify
> >> this, and we can always be more specific when we need to.
> >
> > I agree.
>
> I agree too. You may recall that I recommendi this approach when we
> discussed the web site in January. That thread includes a product
> description [1] that might be a good place to start when describing the
> "whole tool set".
>
> [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-01/msg00457.html
>
> What do you think about  GuixSD >> "Guix Distribution"? This naming seems
to resolve the ambiguities mentioned so far, and has a widespread
use, that exactly matches the intended meaning. WDYT?