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

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 08:10:02PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote:
> 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.

Pushed as 658212ebf7.

> 
> > 
> > Ludo’.
>