From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id 0BgXFAjtr2AcrwAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 21:03:36 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id SEC9Dwjtr2CrAwAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 19:03:36 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6D45D742 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 21:03:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:37900 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lmLI6-0004Tv-Or for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 15:03:34 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49156) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lmLHe-00049L-K9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 15:03:06 -0400 Received: from laurent.telenet-ops.be ([2a02:1800:110:4::f00:19]:55408) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lmLHb-0003wd-1f for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 15:03:06 -0400 Received: from ptr-bvsjgyjmffd7q9timvx.18120a2.ip6.access.telenet.be ([IPv6:2a02:1811:8c09:9d00:aaf1:9810:a0b8:a55d]) by laurent.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id 9v2y2500B0mfAB401v2yS1; Thu, 27 May 2021 21:02:58 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] Getting rid of input labels? From: Maxime Devos To: Ludovic =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 21:02:52 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87k0nlvce4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210520145830.14108-1-ludo@gnu.org> <1dbbcac6e26ae1df767a813698e92cbe364d88fa.camel@telenet.be> <87k0nlvce4.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Wm01WQuc7xPugmMkOENu" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telenet.be; s=r21; t=1622142178; bh=vkc+kMWk5I8Z/ZwfaLK+SZrOpsaoayWOqwnRYLxARPw=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=AUhztpXxaW56DRU1NSob5prBwdRxTLmAEaG6kWBdjGgQTkzVd/URqDcDqq8JbcNs9 VigCGir9e0/4BgLzB4rVXeZC9Ix9NejwbzeqRdF6VL/vcnpDpyHm/xGDVpj3sOUDFP Fy1KZUwIp6aTiTTDt+U1zroaEUKdfDY+OemNYXO8y0FJKrTtIINOVacljb2wnmHKQY cQKuY5USjVboXPaMgL1a3CRRkWM2cmhng5wny9cthpQovaMTVXmKm3IvWukDIc56/e uBfp8nIg0Ch7xH19QFGqBmSwROhRiJQ9Sb1kgLGRVl9hwHhJ97cT7k0kofuZHDWZcE z8/ByT5eOnBXQ== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a02:1800:110:4::f00:19; envelope-from=maximedevos@telenet.be; helo=laurent.telenet-ops.be X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1622142215; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=vkc+kMWk5I8Z/ZwfaLK+SZrOpsaoayWOqwnRYLxARPw=; b=UXf9sQ+YLsDB+ikjuvS4NFf8tePxFXgkhFUayWmdcRBsYv3CHPXmZOqiIgtaiSys+qpgkh Cl4YMSseWhsRTKb4i2v33Gxh4R1x2PO4uGZO390J+NBgYrjE4QtIsKsTXAg7P7ev+C3EuR 9lLT5D4P5cmZXPCBXX/wNCfnJMx3lgvKMBIfgqj39txg9Jp9LGCVvFJMxzqmB7ovAq2EZo Ze6Tg/ngU/6V+nvbITy+zi5QY3/raR5dncS4OpUK41iEIdou/0qFhrxR5mWbCibqFHdZT1 y8Z1Vs1y8blLJUaMEw202iAXmlhd5X2jcNRmgF4EwmWBxwcLk7hK+rtPSKRA7A== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1622142215; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=KXfF56gr9aNVI3P21i4I5TftsJL2ohuC7YD83Yn/Ezr2p7V0b37X4WEXJzMM1ImLo4cRm2 ojNCxH5J1XzJRvK9GJNy/8+bUna5dKKey/sQm7+5KryNZTPbiXVa5mxmoUSF2xYpW3mfve JJh9+18TPoSBrDtqfdWINVDObd+wk+UbzFeDXpCzEocCbakpeCSgz7dZo25mLhdn9h7b1A pA1hTFLOEYAsnym1SyJSntxCJthLlO26vwKl+edDlQhkNn7WohYh064PD+8qSf4+UCaj5b g3CGFj7N/G8kaYrgwqPjcInJ3l4q8VTfjwi5tS0NjIsRDkR5HWqe+JfxVZMlJg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r21 header.b=AUhztpXx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.23 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=telenet.be header.s=r21 header.b=AUhztpXx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=telenet.be; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: A6D45D742 X-Spam-Score: -4.23 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: /vx4YYPAu1EB --=-Wm01WQuc7xPugmMkOENu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ludovic Court=C3=A8s schreef op wo 26-05-2021 om 15:43 [+0200]: > Hi Maxime, >[...] > In many cases, you don=E2=80=99t need the ability to refer to a specific = input; > you just need all the inputs to contribute to search path environment > variables, and that=E2=80=99s enough. A =E2=80=9Clabel collision=E2=80= =9D does not matter at > all in this case. >=20 > In some cases, you do need to refer to a specific input, as in: >=20 > [...] > In this case, there are now two options: >=20 > 1. Arrange so that label is unique among your inputs, as is already > the case. >=20 > 2. [...] > > Do you think there are unaddressed issues with go-ipfs-migrations? As long as there remains a possibility of overriding the =E2=80=98default= =E2=80=98 label generated from the package name, then everything seems ok for the (not-yet-packaged) go-ipfs-migrations. This appears to remain the case, so ok? Greetings, Maxime. --=-Wm01WQuc7xPugmMkOENu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iI0EABYKADUWIQTB8z7iDFKP233XAR9J4+4iGRcl7gUCYK/s3BccbWF4aW1lZGV2 b3NAdGVsZW5ldC5iZQAKCRBJ4+4iGRcl7lxFAQC9cWxr2ueuKKC8tVnfinoScg4v OZQi1LEfZZiehNDuRwD/T2++44nGyEhV9gT/72KHDs3kfQk+fRiffFo2E2rFlgc= =nu2u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Wm01WQuc7xPugmMkOENu--