From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swedebugia Subject: Re: Better names for Guix versions from git? Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2018 22:45:59 +0100 Message-ID: <351d14fe-0edd-6575-939d-981598b65255@riseup.net> References: <87lg4dwfmt.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33093) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gbuQF-0005UL-4o for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Dec 2018 16:39:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gbuQA-0002WY-6p for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Dec 2018 16:39:31 -0500 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]:51353) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gbuQ9-0002Tm-WC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Dec 2018 16:39:26 -0500 Received: from piha.riseup.net (piha-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.163]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 686A81A0450 for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2018 13:39:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by piha.riseup.net with ESMTPSA id 46FB72FE10 for ; Tue, 25 Dec 2018 13:39:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87lg4dwfmt.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US 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: guix-devel@gnu.org On 2018-12-25 20:49, Taylan Kammer wrote: > Currently, after running 'guix pull', the Guix version will be reported > by 'guix --version' as something like: > > 522d1b87bc88dd459ade51b1ee0545937da8d3b5 > > I think it would be really nice if instead it were something like: > > 2018-12-25-522d1b > > where the date is the commit's date (year, month, day) in UTC+0. > > That's shorter, more descriptive, and just as unique. (The chances of > there being two commits in the same day with the same first 6 positions > in the hash should be negligient.) > > The package name is currently something like: > > guix-522d1b87b > > That could become: > > guix-2018-12-25-522d1b > > which is a bit longer but more descriptive. > > I looked into guix/self.scm a bit but couldn't easily tell how difficult > it would be to implement these changes. > > Thoughts? Worth it? I think it is worth it, in fact I was on my way to suggest the same. -- Cheers Swedebugia