From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: Naming, hacking, and policies Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2019 18:33:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87sgv3ype4.fsf@gnu.org> References: <875zs3pg5b.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87wokhhj8n.fsf@nckx> <20190329151636.GA5681@jurong> <87wokh638t.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87tvflzdqs.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36518) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hAdPF-0004qQ-Hc for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Mar 2019 12:34:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87tvflzdqs.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Fri, 29 Mar 2019 20:23:23 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel Ricardo Wurmus skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: > >> Andreas Enge skribis: >> >>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 03:02:00PM +0100, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote: >>>> I still think this change should be reverted >>> >>> I also think so. >> >> I=E2=80=99d also be in favor of reverting. > > I=E2=80=99m also in favour. A pure revert would not be enough, though, w= ould > it? The new names would need to remain as deprecated names (I know of > at least one person who installed some of these games under the long > names). Indeed. So I reverted one in commit e23f2ff1836e982fc2289093aab0994e0c0cf2d2 (this particular rename broke a unit test.) As you can see in this commit, it=E2=80=99s mostly a matter of swapping the package names between the deprecated and the non-deprecated variant. Any takers? Thoughts? Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.