Re: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add llfuse.

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015, at 07:52, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> skribis:
> 
> > Leo Famulari (2015-08-26 20:16 +0300) wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> +   (description "Python-LLFUSE is a set of Python bindings for the low level
> >> +FUSE API.  It requires at least FUSE 2.8.0 and supports both Python 2.x and
> >> +3.x.")
> >
> > IMHO mentioning a version of fuse is not needed.  And IIUC this package
> > provides a python3 library, so I would also remove "supports both …".
> 
> +1

Done.

> 
> >> +   (home-page "https://bitbucket.org/nikratio/python-llfuse/")
> >> +   (license lgpl2.0)))
> >
> > It should be 'lgpl2.0+' as the LICENSE file says "or (at your option)
> > any later version".
> 
> Yes.  Leo, could you also check a few source file headers to confirm
> they either have the “or later” clause, or do not specify any version?

The LLFUSE source files are all "LGPL" without mention of a version. The
LICENSE file is the only place where the version is specified (LGPL
2.0+). However, I also found that an included source file from another
project (underscore.js) is MIT/expat. 

> > Also I think it is better to put this package in "python.scm" as it just
> > contains some general python library.  But I'm not an expert here, so
> > better wait for comments of other people.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> > But I would name it 'python-llfuse' and would also add 'python2-llfuse'
> > package (bug again: I didn't make a single python package).
> 
> Right.  See the convention described at
> <https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/Python-Modules.html>.

Done.

> Leo, could you send an updated patch?

Forthcoming...