From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: bug#31786: 'pre-inst-env guix --version' is not updated by new
	commits"
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 18:36:31 +0200
Message-ID: <87k1r1z5o0.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87r2lddwyg.fsf@gmail.com> <87k1r4p2ca.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87k1r3271g.fsf@gmail.com> <87d0wvoicy.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87o9gf5x0t.fsf@gmail.com> <87wov3npl2.fsf@gnu.org>
	<20180614013938.GD29167@jasmine.lan> <87d0wttn0v.fsf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35592)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1fTVFC-0003jp-LN
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:37:07 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1fTVF8-0008Sh-N5
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:37:06 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:40474)
	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 1fTVF8-0008Ri-Hj
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:37:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1fTVF8-0005tr-Ak
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 12:37:02 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.31786.B31786.152899420422655@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <87d0wttn0v.fsf@gmail.com> (George Clemmer's message of "Thu, 14
	Jun 2018 11:18:08 -0400")
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "bug-Guix" <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: George Clemmer <myglc2@gmail.com>
Cc: 31786@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi George,

George Clemmer <myglc2@gmail.com> skribis:

> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 08:54:49AM +0200, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote:
>>> The other aspect, from a maintenance and readability viewpoint, is that
>>> we could quickly add up lots of explanations that we=E2=80=99ll have to=
 keep
>>> up-to-date and that may make more important information harder to find.
>>
>> Yeah, I'm worried about this too. It's tough to strike the correct
>> balance.
>
> IMO Guix is great for hackers, maintainers and sysops. The doc is
> appropriate for such users, well done, spare, and already voluminous.
>
> This footnote suggestion, and others rejected in the past, are motivated
> by my assumption that you will want to make Guix attractive to less
> sophisticated users.
>
> Maybe my assumption is wrong? Maybe you want only "elite" users?

No, definitely not; I=E2=80=99m sorry if this is the impression this gave.

Like I wrote, my main concern is about keeping the documentation focused
and maintainable.  Sometimes we have to document things that are
technically outside of Guix because there=E2=80=99s no real canonical
documentation and because users would be impaired without it=E2=80=94I=E2=
=80=99m
thinking for instance of bits in the =E2=80=9CPreparing for Installation=E2=
=80=9D
section.

In this case, we=E2=80=99d be documenting something that=E2=80=99s both out=
side of Guix
and not vital for routine usage, and that=E2=80=99s mostly covered by the
Autoconf manual.  Hence my reluctance.

I hope that makes sense.

Ludo=E2=80=99.