From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH] services: nginx: Allow for server extensions. Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2015 00:06:59 +0100 Message-ID: <874mftsvsc.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874mg2tg7s.fsf@izanagi.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87r3j51dfo.fsf@gnu.org> <20151207195703.GB26940@jasmine> 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]:47109) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a64s5-0001Uo-AC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 18:07:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a64s2-0008NG-KQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 18:07:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20151207195703.GB26940@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:57:03 -0500") 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari skribis: > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 10:07:23AM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> David Thompson skribis: >>=20 >> > Looking for some feedback on my first stab at making the nginx service >> > extensible. With this extension mechanism, future web applications >> > (such as GNU MediaGoblin) that use nginx as a front-end web server will >> > be able to extend nginx with the server configuration that they need in >> > order to work. >>=20 >> Excellent! >>=20 >> > Here's a useless service that adds nginx configuration to serve the >> > contents of /tmp: >> > >> > (define server >> > (plain-file "foo.conf" >> > " >> > server { >> > listen 80; >> > root /tmp; >> > index index.html; >> > server_name dthompson.us; >> > } >> > ")) >>=20 >> Do you think it would make sense to provide Scheme bindings for those >> =E2=80=98server=E2=80=99 configuration snippets, or would we lose too mu= ch >> expressiveness? > > I think you might lose too much, although I don't use GuixSD so I > don't know if there are other programs that are configured through > Scheme bindings. I know that I don't like the Nix bindings for systemd > in NixOS. They can't keep up with the pace of development in systemd and > provide a limited set of features. Right, that=E2=80=99s exactly why I was asking: in some cases it=E2=80=99s = OK to write bindings (they=E2=80=99re more convenient and just as expressive), but in o= ther cases they=E2=80=99d be a loss, as you explain. Thanks for your feedback! Ludo=E2=80=99.