Re: Services can now have a default value

[Carlo Zancanaro <carlo@zancanaro.id.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1045 bytes --]

I have a question related to this, but about a broader issue.

On Sat, Apr 15 2017, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>   (service openssh-service-type)

Is this supposed to be the preferred way to add a service to your
operating system? Or, put another way, as a service writer: should I
consider a *-service-type to be sufficient to complete the work of
creating a service?

Looking at various services that we have defined at the moment
(according to what is documented), most services have a procedure (ie.
*-service), and maybe also a *-service-type. For example, in "Database
Services" we have postgresql-service and mysql-service, with no
corresponding *-service-type. But then we have redis-service-type
without a *-service to go with it.

I wonder if we would be better off creating *-service procedures for
each *-service-type and documenting them as the canonical way to create
services. That way we could handle things like default arguments through
the usual scheme mechanisms, rather than our own special case.

Carlo

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]