Hi Oleg,

> I've pushed the split III to master.

Fantastic work!

> I think you may help! The identification of the group is still human
> decision making process and I'm not sure it may be automated in any point.

I can certainly help with this then. I'll have some free time on Friday and
I can coordinate with you then.

> Each of the module header contains a  short annotation which packages it
>  expects to have, feel free to improve it to make it even more clear
> for  others.
>
> -  golang-check
> -  golang-web
> -  golang-crypto
>
> TBA:
> -  golang-compression :: Anything related to that subject, see
>  python-compression, java-compression, perl-compression.
>
> -  golang-build or golang-extension :: Any low level golang add-ons not
>  included in core distribution see <https://pkg.go.dev/golang.org/x> or
> any 0  dependencies high reference modules.
>
> -  golang-xyz :: As any other *-xyz module would absorb anything else
>   left  behind.

This all sounds sensible to me.

>> 1.  Put a magic comment above each package that you would like to move.
>> 2.  Run a simple script that makes a note of all of these into a
>>  to-move-list.
>> 3.  Then stash the change with the comments you made (in case you need
>> to  change things)
>> 4.  Run another script that takes the package list and performs the
>>  move in one's repository.
>> 5.  Sort out the use-package declarations manually and run tests.
>> 6.  When satisfied, stash the change and keep just the use-package
>>  changes.
>> 7.  Run a final script that loops through all the packages and commits
>>  each one in turn.
>> 8.  Rebase to suit.
>
> We may  extend handy script accelerating committing process, see
>  "etc/committer.scm"

Okay, cool, I'll have a look at it on Friday.

>> -  I'm not a scheme programmer, but I did use Haskell at university so
>>  I'm familiar with thinking in a functional style.
> Me too  =), but you still can help by just providing some review to
>  existing code base and available packages in golagn.scm and trying to
>  identify close group for each of them.
>
>>  I'm also imagining some the possibility of having a script that can
>>  remove redundant #:use-module's in the future, though I don't know if
>> we  care about a few unneeded modules being included.
> The  clean up task may be organasied after sort process is completed, having
> not  required #:use-module does not hurt too much but for keeping modules
> tidy  and fast to load it definitely beneficial.

This makes sense. Not a priority at present but a nice-to

Looking forward to hacking golang.scm to pieces!

Kind regards,
  - Christina