Re: [PATCH 0/1] Move cursynth to music.scm

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:33:25AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:
> 
> > Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:
> >
> >> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 05:17:15PM -0600, Eric Bavier wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:09:09 -0500
> >>> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> > I think it would be better for this software synthesizer to be in
> >>> > music.scm.
> >>> > 
> >>> > Thoughts?
> >>> 
> >>> IIRC, the original thought was that many GNU packages have their own
> >>> modules, so this was done for cursynth as well.
> >>
> >> Okay, sure.
> >
> > I think it would be nice to have cursynth in “music.scm”.
> 
> +1
> 
> >> To be honest, I don't understand the reasoning behind grouping packages
> >> into modules. Is it just for humans or is there some technical reason
> >> for it?
> >
> > It’s mostly for humans AFAIU.  Personally, I prefer try to avoid a
> > proliferation of one-off modules; maybe because I don’t like the
> > boilerplate (license header, module definition with imports, adding the
> > module to “gnu-system.am”).
> 
> Same here.
> 
> More modules also lead to more I/O for the various commands.

That's a good reason.

I'll apply the patch if there are no objections.

> 
> Ludo’.