From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brett Gilio Subject: bug#38529: Make --ad-hoc the default for guix environment proposed deprecation mechanism Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:22:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4ee893ad-b489-4e98-b716-e418cd3b8049__29299.8566453875$1576592597$gmane$org@localhost> References: <87eexeu8mo.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87k16vdise.fsf@gnu.org> <87pngncc0n.fsf@kyleam.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54841) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDkd-0001Sp-2l for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:23:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDkc-0004lb-2W for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:23:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:34912) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDkb-0004lU-Vw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:23:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ihDkb-0003vo-TK for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:23:01 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87pngncc0n.fsf@kyleam.com> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Kyle Meyer Cc: Guix-devel , 38529@debbugs.gnu.org Dec 17, 2019 7:34:17 AM Kyle Meyer : > G=E1bor Boskovits writes: > > > > Konrad Hinsen ezt =EDrta (id?pont: 2019. dec. > > 17., Ke 7:52): > > > [...] > > > > > > How about a more drastic measure: deprecate "guix environment" and > > > introduce a new subcommand with the desired new behaviour? > > > > > > > > That is also the other option I was thinking about. Do you have any goo= d > > idea in mind as how to call it? Of course the classic guix environment2 > > comes to my mind, but it does not look very appealing to me. > > > > Perhaps "guix env"? > +1 for guix env