Re: Roadmap for Guix 1.0

[George Clemmer <myglc2@gmail.com>]

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I think “Guix System” is OK.
>
> I think so too.

I recommend against renaming GuixSD >> "Guix System". Here is Why:

1) A noob would expect "guix system" to refer to the whole Guix
enchilada. If we use it to refer to GuixSD, a specific Guix deployment
mode, we have created a new, counter-intuitive thing we have to explain.

2) As Ricardo points out below, the "guix system" command clashes with
this use of Guix system. This is a second counter-intuitive thing we
would have to explain.

Bottom line: we shouln'd use the general term "Guix System" in any way
beyond, perhaps in a descriptway way, e.g., The Guix project develops
the Guix System, a set of tools that manage software environments.

>> Most of the time we’ll just say “Guix”, as
>> is already the case, and when we need to disambiguate (for instance when
>> addressing bugs), we’ll ask “Are you using Guix System?” or “Are you
>> using the Guix distro?”, and everything will be fine.  :-)
>
> Exactly.
>
> I wrote this on IRC:
>
> The name “GuixSD” is opaque and creates an arbitrary distinction between
> the system running on bare metal and the systems you can create with the
> “guix system” commands.  It makes it difficult to communicate about
> Guix.  Do we really offer “a package manager” and a “distro” — or is it
> really all one thing with various levels?
>
> The “guix system” command can be used without GuixSD to create Guix
> virtual machines or containers.  Describing “guix system” is difficult
> when we think in terms of “package manager” vs “distro”.  Guix itself is
> also a distro – none of the packages it provides link with the host
> system, and the collection of packages is a distribution of free
> software.
>
> I think that simplifying the name by using “guix” as a category will
> make communication easier.
>
>> The motivation for this name change is that “SD” is obscure to most, as
>> you note, plus it creates confusion when people visit the web site: the
>> web site has a “GuixSD” logo, but then it talks about features of the
>> package manager.  Designating the whole tool set as “Guix” will simplify
>> this, and we can always be more specific when we need to.
>
> I agree.

I agree too. You may recall that I recommendi this approach when we
discussed the web site in January. That thread includes a product
description [1] that might be a good place to start when describing the
"whole tool set".

[1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-01/msg00457.html