From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Brett Gilio <brettg@posteo.net>
Subject: Re: Next browser finally on master!
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 14:34:49 -0600
Message-ID: <87tvj9mf12.fsf@posteo.net>
References: <87in085kk2.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> <87woo5y6yq.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87woo5mjzt.fsf@posteo.net> <877eg5jq3s.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
	<8736qttg3h.fsf@elephly.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33861)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1gZiYV-0008TA-9J
	for help-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:34:59 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1gZiYQ-0001Oe-9Z
	for help-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:34:59 -0500
Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:54115)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <brettg@posteo.net>) id 1gZiYQ-0001Ky-1m
	for help-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 15:34:54 -0500
Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130])
	by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1586160061
	for <help-guix@gnu.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 21:34:52 +0100 (CET)
In-reply-to: <8736qttg3h.fsf@elephly.net>
List-Id: <help-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/help-guix>,
	<mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/>
List-Post: <mailto:help-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-guix>,
	<mailto:help-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Help-Guix" <help-guix-bounces+gcggh-help-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Cc: help-guix <help-guix@gnu.org>


Ricardo Wurmus writes:

> Hi Pierre,
>
>>> I am also in favor
>>> of renaming SBCL-Next to something else. I know that we are using sbcl
>>> instead of clisp for building it, but the naming scheme seems to imply
>>> an SBCL library or module rather than a web browser application.
>>
>> This is being discussed for stumpwm in bug #33311. [=E2=80=A6]
>
> I=E2=80=99ve read that discussion, but I don=E2=80=99t see how it is rele=
vant.
> The *name* of the package surely does not have any effect on the
> features, does it?
>
> For applications like StumpWM and Next we could change the package names
> to =E2=80=9Cstumpwm=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cnext=E2=80=9D, respectively.  T=
hat these packages can *also*
> be used as libraries does not mean that the packages should have names
> with the =E2=80=9Csbcl-=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Ccl-=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Coth=
er-lisp-=E2=80=9D prefix.
>
> Am I misunderstanding something?

That was my understanding as well Ricardo. I do not see how renaming the
package would detach it from its respective compiler. It should still be
just as hackable in SLIME... Or so I thought?

Brett