Hi Maxime! > Snippets can be G-expressions. Personally, I'd go with a G-expression > instead of an S-expression, because > > * that makes it more obvious it is staged code, and not, say, SXML > * G-exps are cool [citation needed] > >> + (build-system go-build-system) >> + (arguments [...]) I see. Would you be able to illustrate with a snippet please? I haven't used G-exps much. > A bit large, but all the code there seems required > Seems ok, though not being able to build i18n files is a bit > unfortunate. Yeah. TypeScript shenanigans with the i18n. >> + (synopsis "White-label VPN client by LEAP") > > About ‘White-label’: this seems an odd thing to say about software. > Here is a definition, in case we are talking about different things: > > From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=White-label_product&oldid=1028825641): > > ‘A white-label product is a product or service produced by one company (the producer) > that other companies (the marketers) rebrand to make it appear as if they had made > it.[1][2] The name derives from the image of a white label on the packaging that can > be filled in with the marketer's trade dress. White label products are sold by retailers > with their own trademark but the products themselves are manufactured by a third party.[3]’ > > bitmask isn't a product or a service, it's just software. > It is also not sold. I don't see how ‘white-label’ can apply to bitmask. > > Also, I don't see what value adding "White-label" to the synopsis > provides to users(*). > > (*) Here, ‘users’ are all people using Guix. Including people hacking on Guix > (‘developers’). > > I'd drop "White-label" from the synopsis. I used white-label because bitmask is neither a service provider on its own nor tied-to/developed-for specific provider. Whichever supported provider is chosen the application name, icons, logo etc becomes that of the provider. In other words, the app re-brands itself based on chosen VPN provider. But I'll change the while-label to generic, in the synopsis. Regards, RG.