From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: Services can now have a default value Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:18:51 +0000 Message-ID: <20170419151851.kmb4wdgktyrn6ma3@abyayala> References: <87shl9qo7h.fsf@gnu.org> <877f2go3wn.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49193) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0rNt-0005UW-RB for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:19:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d0rNp-0002Fw-5n for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:19:09 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877f2go3wn.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Carlo Zancanaro Cc: guix-devel Carlo Zancanaro transcribed 1.7K bytes: > I have a question related to this, but about a broader issue. >=20 > On Sat, Apr 15 2017, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > > (service openssh-service-type) >=20 > Is this supposed to be the preferred way to add a service to your > operating system? Or, put another way, as a service writer: should I > consider a *-service-type to be sufficient to complete the work of > creating a service? >=20 > Looking at various services that we have defined at the moment > (according to what is documented), most services have a procedure (ie. > *-service), and maybe also a *-service-type. For example, in "Database > Services" we have postgresql-service and mysql-service, with no > corresponding *-service-type. But then we have redis-service-type > without a *-service to go with it. >=20 > I wonder if we would be better off creating *-service procedures for > each *-service-type and documenting them as the canonical way to create > services. That way we could handle things like default arguments throug= h > the usual scheme mechanisms, rather than our own special case. >=20 > Carlo Yeah I fully agree and sympathize with the need for a canonical way to create services. In packages, we habe some kind of framework (with some expectations), with system-services it is currently as free as it gets in freedom of expression. Which is both good and confusing to get started with. --=20 PGP and more: https://people.pragmatique.xyz/ng0/