From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andy Patterson <ajpatter@uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Re: Next browser finally on master!
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2019 23:32:09 -0500
Message-ID: <20190102233209.4d0f7414@mailservices.uwaterloo.ca>
References: <87in085kk2.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87woo5y6yq.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87woo5mjzt.fsf@posteo.net> <877eg5jq3s.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
	<8736qttg3h.fsf@elephly.net> <87tvj9mf12.fsf@posteo.net>
	<87zht1i4nt.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44881)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ajpatter@uwaterloo.ca>) id 1gevcq-00008M-V2
	for help-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:33:01 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ajpatter@uwaterloo.ca>) id 1gevcl-0005ry-V8
	for help-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:33:00 -0500
Received: from mailchk-m03.uwaterloo.ca ([129.97.128.240]:33848)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ajpatter@uwaterloo.ca>)
	id 1gevcj-0005bA-Un
	for help-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2019 00:32:55 -0500
In-Reply-To: <87zht1i4nt.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
List-Id: <help-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/help-guix>,
	<mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:help-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-guix>,
	<mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Help-Guix" <help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz>
Cc: help-guix <help-guix@gnu.org>

Hi,

Sorry for taking so long to chime in.

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 22:32:22 +0100
Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> wrote:

> [...]
>
> That would not be consistent with the Lisp library naming scheme then.
> And it raises the question as to why we have bothered with the sbcl-
> and ecl- prefixes so far.
> 
> Andy, any opinion on this?
> 

That information is there to make sure that the transformer which
converts sbcl packages to source and ecl packages works properly.  If
it's not being used, then there's no need to follow it.  Even when it is
being used, it's always possible to manually override the name of the
final package - the convention is only there to make package name
transformation automatic.  So if it's more desirable in a given
situation to use a non-conforming name, there's nothing that will
prevent you from doing so.

Hoping that helps,

--
Andy