Hi Ludovic,

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> To me the end goal was to move these “effectful” bits into a script,
> such that both ‘guix system reconfigure’ and ‘guix deploy’ would only
> have to run that script, locally or remotely. That would avoid
> duplicating these somewhat tricky procedures.

Ah, that's starting to ring a bell now. I believe you mentioned that
when 'guix deploy' was initially being proposed, but at the time I
didn't quite register that we'd be extracting the behavior in that way.

> Now, perhaps we can start like this, and leave factorization for
> later? I just want to make sure we don’t forget about that and let it
> evolve into something we have a hard time maintaining.
>
> WDYT?

I agree. I'm getting the impression that people don't want this to sit
in review limbo for too long, and in terms of "commit history hygiene,"
I think it would be better to recognize refactoring out the common
behavior as a distinct change.

Thanks!

Regards,
Jakob