From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48416)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hhL8d-0005Iw-PH
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:44:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hhL8c-0002Po-Ph
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:44:03 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:59697)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1hhL8c-0002Ph-Lw
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:44:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hhL8c-0005J3-Ho
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:44:02 -0400
Subject: [bug#36404] [PATCH 6/6] doc: Add section for 'guix deploy'.
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.36404.B.156184460120340@debbugs.gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48286)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2)
 (envelope-from <cwebber@dustycloud.org>) id 1hhL7u-0005CF-4J
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:43:20 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <cwebber@dustycloud.org>) id 1hhL7p-0001tH-F1
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:43:15 -0400
Received: from dustycloud.org ([2600:3c02::f03c:91ff:feae:cb51]:33464)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <cwebber@dustycloud.org>)
 id 1hhL7j-0001ob-2a
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:43:08 -0400
References: <87o92ianbj.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org>
 <87imsqan66.fsf@sdf.lonestar.org> <87ef3ean4i.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org>
 <87a7e2an3h.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org> <875zoqan2e.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org>
 <871rzean1i.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org> <87woh698fn.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org>
From: Christopher Lemmer Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
In-reply-to: <87woh698fn.fsf_-_@sdf.lonestar.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2019 17:43:04 -0400
Message-ID: <87ftnskqzb.fsf@dustycloud.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: 36404@debbugs.gnu.org

Jakob L. Kreuze writes:

> +The file should evaluate to a list of machines, rather than just one.

This phrasing confused me for a second, because it could be just one
machine in that list.

How about:

  The file should evaluate to a list of @var{machine} objects.
or:
  The file should evaluate to a list of @var{<machine>} objects.

Not sure whether the angle brackets help or hurt.

Looks great otherwise.  I left a few other comments in response to the
other patches; please review and make changes, but I think there isn't
too much to do to get this in.  IMO we should get this in as quickly as
possible; I'd love to do so ideally in the next week so it doesn't
stagnate and so people can start trying to use it.

Really thrilling stuff Jakob; great work!  It's exciting to have you as
part of the Guix team.