all messages for Guix-related lists mirrored at yhetil.org
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>
To: John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Reorganizing guix package commands
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:01:13 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737qijad2.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160418161056.GA30756@jocasta.intra> (John Darrington's message of "Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:10:56 +0200")

John Darrington (2016-04-18 19:10 +0300) wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:57:59AM +0300, Alex Kost wrote:
>      I've just sent a message to bug#22587??, but I realized it is better to
>      discuss it here in a separate thread.
>
>      So, I think there are inconsistencies in guix commands.  For example, we
>      have "guix system build" to build a system, but "guix build" to build a
>      package.  IMO "guix package build" would be a better choice.
>
>      In general, I think it would be good to move package commands inside
>      "guix package", e.g, to make "guix package lint", "guix package size",
>      etc.
>
> I'm not saying that you're wrong.  But I think the idea is that guix build
> is a command for development, whereas guix package is a command for users.
> I think the two need to be kept separate.

Sorry, I don't understand this point: we all are users of "guix"
command.  It looks natural to me that when you want to build a system,
you write "guix system build", and when you want to build a package, you
write "guix package build"; when you want to install a package, you
can write "guix package install".  Why a user wouldn't want just to
build a package?  For example, I do it all the time when I want just to
try a package without installing.

>      Wouldn't it be great to make some breaking changes?  I mean if this or
>      any other proposal on "guix" command structure is reasonable, I think
>      it's just the time for it while Guix is still alpha/beta.  Otherwise,
>      the current command structure will never be changed.
>
>
> I wouldn't mind seeing a few of the more recent commands as options to
> (a possibly renamed) guix build.  For example it seems to me that guix
> environment is specific to a package so perhaps that is a good candidate.

Wow, I have a reverse impression: I think "guix environment" is the
worst candidate for moving elsewhere (I mean it is good as it is now)
and it should stay as a stand-alone command.

-- 
Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-19  8:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-18  8:57 Reorganizing guix package commands Alex Kost
2016-04-18 16:10 ` John Darrington
2016-04-19  8:01   ` Alex Kost [this message]
2016-04-18 17:20 ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-04-18 21:50   ` myglc2
2016-04-19  5:17     ` John Darrington
2016-04-19 12:57       ` myglc2
2016-04-19 13:03         ` Thompson, David
2016-04-19 13:35           ` John Darrington
2016-04-19 13:51           ` myglc2
2016-04-19 15:24       ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-04-19 10:47     ` Alex Kost
2016-04-19 10:58       ` Ricardo Wurmus
2016-04-19 12:45       ` myglc2
2016-04-19  7:52   ` Alex Kost
2016-04-19  9:17     ` Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
2016-04-19 10:37       ` Alex Kost
2016-04-19  9:23     ` Hartmut Goebel
2016-04-19 10:16       ` Alex Kost
2016-04-19 14:39       ` John Darrington
2016-04-19 13:00     ` myglc2
2016-04-19 13:43       ` Ricardo Wurmus
2016-04-19 14:29         ` myglc2
2016-04-19 13:55     ` Ricardo Wurmus
2016-04-19 15:52     ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-04-19 19:56       ` Christopher Allan Webber
2016-04-20  3:45       ` myglc2
2016-04-20  5:34         ` John Darrington
2016-04-20  8:52           ` Alex Kost
2016-04-20 17:05             ` myglc2
2016-04-20  8:29       ` Alex Kost
2016-04-20  9:46         ` Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
2016-04-20 21:45           ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-04-21 12:34             ` myglc2
2016-04-21  5:20           ` John Darrington
2016-04-20  9:29       ` Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
2016-04-21  2:49         ` Efraim Flashner
2016-04-21  7:10           ` Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
2016-04-18 21:13 ` Hartmut Goebel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8737qijad2.fsf@gmail.com \
    --to=alezost@gmail.com \
    --cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=john@darrington.wattle.id.au \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.