Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[Mark H Weaver]

kei@openmailbox.org (Kei Kebreau) writes:

> kkebreau pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository guix.
>
> commit 0e4591bb696a36bc83f75869dd2711987b17b722
> Author: ng0 <ng0@no-reply.pragmatique.xyz>
> Date:   Tue May 16 22:28:58 2017 +0000
>
>     gnu: Add s.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/shells.scm (s): New variable.
>     
>     Signed-off-by: Kei Kebreau <kei@openmailbox.org>
> ---
>  gnu/packages/shells.scm | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gnu/packages/shells.scm b/gnu/packages/shells.scm
> index 5eeb186..5e04e86 100644
> --- a/gnu/packages/shells.scm
> +++ b/gnu/packages/shells.scm
> @@ -503,6 +503,67 @@ Its features include:
>  @end enumerate\n")
>      (license bsd-2)))
>  
> +(define-public s
> +  (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c")
> +        (revision "1"))
> +    (package
> +      (name "s")
> +      (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))

I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or
something along those lines.  's' is commonly used as a local variable
name.  Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't
think we should allocate them to packages.

Thoughts?

      Mark

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[ng0]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1563 bytes --]

Mark H Weaver transcribed 1.2K bytes:
> kei@openmailbox.org (Kei Kebreau) writes:
> 
> > kkebreau pushed a commit to branch master
> > in repository guix.
> >
> > commit 0e4591bb696a36bc83f75869dd2711987b17b722
> > Author: ng0 <ng0@no-reply.pragmatique.xyz>
> > Date:   Tue May 16 22:28:58 2017 +0000
> >
> >     gnu: Add s.
> >     
> >     * gnu/packages/shells.scm (s): New variable.
> >     
> >     Signed-off-by: Kei Kebreau <kei@openmailbox.org>
> > ---
> >  gnu/packages/shells.scm | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/gnu/packages/shells.scm b/gnu/packages/shells.scm
> > index 5eeb186..5e04e86 100644
> > --- a/gnu/packages/shells.scm
> > +++ b/gnu/packages/shells.scm
> > @@ -503,6 +503,67 @@ Its features include:
> >  @end enumerate\n")
> >      (license bsd-2)))
> >  
> > +(define-public s
> > +  (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c")
> > +        (revision "1"))
> > +    (package
> > +      (name "s")
> > +      (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))
> 
> I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or
> something along those lines.  's' is commonly used as a local variable
> name.  Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't
> think we should allocate them to packages.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
>       Mark

I did not think of this use, renaming to s-shell is okay.

-- 
ng0
OpenPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[Kei Kebreau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1596 bytes --]

ng0 <ng0@pragmatique.xyz> writes:

> Mark H Weaver transcribed 1.2K bytes:
>> kei@openmailbox.org (Kei Kebreau) writes:
>> 
>> > kkebreau pushed a commit to branch master
>> > in repository guix.
>> >
>> > commit 0e4591bb696a36bc83f75869dd2711987b17b722
>> > Author: ng0 <ng0@no-reply.pragmatique.xyz>
>> > Date:   Tue May 16 22:28:58 2017 +0000
>> >
>> >     gnu: Add s.
>> >     
>> >     * gnu/packages/shells.scm (s): New variable.
>> >     
>> >     Signed-off-by: Kei Kebreau <kei@openmailbox.org>
>> > ---
>> >  gnu/packages/shells.scm | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/gnu/packages/shells.scm b/gnu/packages/shells.scm
>> > index 5eeb186..5e04e86 100644
>> > --- a/gnu/packages/shells.scm
>> > +++ b/gnu/packages/shells.scm
>> > @@ -503,6 +503,67 @@ Its features include:
>> >  @end enumerate\n")
>> >      (license bsd-2)))
>> >  
>> > +(define-public s
>> > +  (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c")
>> > +        (revision "1"))
>> > +    (package
>> > +      (name "s")
>> > +      (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))
>> 
>> I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or
>> something along those lines.  's' is commonly used as a local variable
>> name.  Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't
>> think we should allocate them to packages.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>>       Mark
>
> I did not think of this use, renaming to s-shell is okay.

I agree.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[Alex Kost]

Mark H Weaver (2017-06-04 20:15 -0400) wrote:

>> +(define-public s
>> +  (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c")
>> +        (revision "1"))
>> +    (package
>> +      (name "s")
>> +      (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))
>
> I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or
> something along those lines.  's' is commonly used as a local variable
> name.  Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't
> think we should allocate them to packages.
>
> Thoughts?

And what about "r" package?

In my opinion, package names for "r" and "s" should stay the same – I
think these names are expected by users.  As for the variable names,
they may be renamed, if it is needed.

-- 
Alex

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[Mark H Weaver]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> writes:

> Mark H Weaver (2017-06-04 20:15 -0400) wrote:
>
>>> +(define-public s
>>> +  (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c")
>>> +        (revision "1"))
>>> +    (package
>>> +      (name "s")
>>> +      (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))
>>
>> I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or
>> something along those lines.  's' is commonly used as a local variable
>> name.  Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't
>> think we should allocate them to packages.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> And what about "r" package?

Ah, I had forgotten about 'r'.  Thanks for reminding me :)

I think we can make an exception for a package as firmly established and
widely used as 'r'.  It's already been in Guix for a long time, and
there are hundreds of packages based on it.

However, 's' has not yet had any releases, and as with any highly
experimental new program, chances are quite slim that it will ever gain
a non-trivial number of users.  That's nothing personal, it's just a
simple fact about new projects: the overwhelming majority of new
projects never gain traction.

Do we really want to permanently allocate to it one of the 25 remaining
lowercase ASCII single-letter names?  That's prime real-estate in the
space of possible names.  Frankly, I think it's hubris for someone to
claim one of those names for their experimental new project.  Do we want
to set a precedent that anyone can grab one of those single-character
names for their pet project, regardless of whether it has any users
besides its author?

> In my opinion, package names for "r" and "s" should stay the same – I
> think these names are expected by users.  As for the variable names,
> they may be renamed, if it is needed.

I can understand that point of view.  Recently, someone named their new
package 'ao'.  We simply weren't able to give it that name in Guix,
because we already have a package named 'ao' in Guix.

If only 26 people in the entire world choose to give their project a
two-letter name, then the chances are good that there will be a
collision (c.f. birthday paradox), and one of them will need to be
renamed.

Likewise, if only 5 people in the world choose a single-letter name,
then chances are good that there will be a collision.  Who here has the
hubris to choose one of those names?  Do we want to enable that?

        Mark

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[Alex Kost]

Mark H Weaver (2017-06-06 16:47 -0400) wrote:

> Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Mark H Weaver (2017-06-04 20:15 -0400) wrote:
>>
>>>> +(define-public s
>>>> +  (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c")
>>>> +        (revision "1"))
>>>> +    (package
>>>> +      (name "s")
>>>> +      (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))
>>>
>>> I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or
>>> something along those lines.  's' is commonly used as a local variable
>>> name.  Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't
>>> think we should allocate them to packages.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> And what about "r" package?
>
> Ah, I had forgotten about 'r'.  Thanks for reminding me :)
>
> I think we can make an exception for a package as firmly established and
> widely used as 'r'.  It's already been in Guix for a long time, and
> there are hundreds of packages based on it.
>
> However, 's' has not yet had any releases, and as with any highly
> experimental new program, chances are quite slim that it will ever gain
> a non-trivial number of users.  That's nothing personal, it's just a
> simple fact about new projects: the overwhelming majority of new
> projects never gain traction.
>
> Do we really want to permanently allocate to it one of the 25 remaining
> lowercase ASCII single-letter names?  That's prime real-estate in the
> space of possible names.  Frankly, I think it's hubris for someone to
> claim one of those names for their experimental new project.  Do we want
> to set a precedent that anyone can grab one of those single-character
> names for their pet project, regardless of whether it has any users
> besides its author?
>
>> In my opinion, package names for "r" and "s" should stay the same – I
>> think these names are expected by users.  As for the variable names,
>> they may be renamed, if it is needed.
>
> I can understand that point of view.  Recently, someone named their new
> package 'ao'.  We simply weren't able to give it that name in Guix,
> because we already have a package named 'ao' in Guix.
>
> If only 26 people in the entire world choose to give their project a
> two-letter name, then the chances are good that there will be a
> collision (c.f. birthday paradox), and one of them will need to be
> renamed.
>
> Likewise, if only 5 people in the world choose a single-letter name,
> then chances are good that there will be a collision.  Who here has the
> hubris to choose one of those names?  Do we want to enable that?

Thanks for this descriptive answer!  Now I understand your position and
I agree with it :-)

BTW, I've just recalled that there are "s" and "f" emacs packages (we
named them "emacs-s" and "emacs-f", of course).

-- 
Alex

Re: 02/02: gnu: Add s.

[Mark H Weaver]

Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com> writes:

> Mark H Weaver (2017-06-06 16:47 -0400) wrote:
>
>> If only 26 people in the entire world choose to give their project a
>> two-letter name, then the chances are good that there will be a
>> collision (c.f. birthday paradox), and one of them will need to be
>> renamed.
>>
>> Likewise, if only 5 people in the world choose a single-letter name,
>> then chances are good that there will be a collision.  Who here has the
>> hubris to choose one of those names?  Do we want to enable that?
>
> Thanks for this descriptive answer!  Now I understand your position and
> I agree with it :-)

Thanks :)  I renamed it to "s-shell" in commit
9a68fb6c3002f3e440bb01d8c25c660800101c1b.

      Mark