From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
Subject: Re: (Exposing?) config files and non-start/stop operations
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2016 09:48:23 -0600
Message-ID: <87r35w2abc.fsf@dustycloud.org>
References: <87a8cuaszg.fsf@dustycloud.org> <878tsdbx2d.fsf@dustycloud.org>
	<87polpo2k4.fsf@gmail.com> <877f7wbyc7.fsf@dustycloud.org>
	<87poln86mx.fsf@gnu.org> <87mvgpj1kq.fsf@dustycloud.org>
	<87shqh57ht.fsf@gnu.org> <87fumghvdc.fsf@dustycloud.org>
	<87r35ynnm0.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47661)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cwebber@dustycloud.org>) id 1cB1gn-0003BP-9u
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Nov 2016 10:48:26 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cwebber@dustycloud.org>) id 1cB1gm-0003ms-MT
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Nov 2016 10:48:25 -0500
In-reply-to: <87r35ynnm0.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes:

> Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org> skribis:
> Adding a =E2=80=98config=E2=80=99 action where we see fit would certain=
ly make sense,
> yes.  I guess it=E2=80=99ll have to be decided on a case-by-case basis,=
 and
> perhaps we=E2=80=99ll see that this pattern makes sense for a whole cla=
ss of
> services.
>
> Ludo=E2=80=99.

Ok!  Well, glad we had this discussion... if I bump into the right
itch-scratching moment maybe I'll get the exposing shepherd actions
implemented and we can go from there.  Otherwise others are welcome to!
:)

 - Chris