From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49032) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hKjpf-0006Ta-BO for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 09:27:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hKjpe-0003xA-AG for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 09:27:03 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:51605) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hKjpe-0003x3-7H for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 09:27:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hKjpd-0000sh-W7 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2019 09:27:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#35456] [PATCH 0/1] Add 'guix install', 'guix remove', and 'guix upgrade' Resent-Message-ID: From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <20190427162500.13554-1-ludo@gnu.org> Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 15:26:41 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Jonathan Brielmaier's message of "Sun, 28 Apr 2019 13:26:42 +0200") Message-ID: <87tvei9s6m.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Jonathan Brielmaier Cc: 35456@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Jonathan, Jonathan Brielmaier skribis: > On 4/27/19 6:25 PM, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> Thoughts? Rejection? Happiness? :-) > > I think we shouldn't do this for the 1.0 release. We should take some > time here. One reason is that it's quite some work to get this > documented and then translated... The patch provides documentation that boils down to ~10 lines since these are just aliases. (Also, I think it=E2=80=99s reasonable to say we t= ook our time: it had been in =E2=80=981.0.org=E2=80=99 since July 2018 and we= =E2=80=99ve been discussing it for years before that. :-)) > The idea of offering new commands for often used ones, is very good. > Personally I would also like to have 'guix search' and 'guix show', as I > use them quite often :) Yeah, why not. > What I like about the guix command line interface, is the consistency > and logic. Especially if I compare it with some random (open)SUSE tool > like zypper, which has a almost 50 subcommands ("zypper SUBCOMMAND"). > That's something we shouldn't imitate. > > I feel that grouping commands in subcommands and subsubcommands like > with 'guix system' is a good idea. At the moment I see there some room > for improvement. > > We have a lot of developer commands directly under 'guix', like > download, link etc. But the most "end-user" commands are under 'guix > package' or 'guix system'... > > For 'guix system' it could make sense to move 'guix system > {container,vm-image,disk,docker-image}' to something like 'guix create'. I agree the CLI structure could be improved in several areas. In fact, there have been radical proposals in the past to overhaul the whole CLI. I think =E2=80=9Cguix install=E2=80=9D & co. require special attention thou= gh: people have come to expect install/remove/upgrade sub-commands from their package manager and these are the first commands they=E2=80=99ll run. It c= osts us very little in terms of maintenance, but it certainly helps newcomers get started. Does that make sense? Thanks for your feedback! Ludo=E2=80=99.