From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] gnu: Add gpgscm.
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:35:54 +0200
Message-ID: <87wpkjp1hx.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87lh0z97jm.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
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]:45968)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bP7mE-0000hy-AO
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:36:06 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1bP7mA-0004Cw-Cn
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:36:01 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87lh0z97jm.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> (ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is's
	message of "Sun, 17 Jul 2016 23:19:41 +0000")
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: ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Hello!

ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> skribis:

> From 6babb18479de83bd19c44412c7957918d2c917b2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is>
> Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 22:11:41 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH 4/6] gnu: Add gpgscm.
>
> * gnu/packages/gnupg.scm (gpgscm): New variable.

[...]

> +    (home-page "https://gnupg.org/")
> +    (synopsis "tinyscheme implementation used by The GNU Privacy Guard")

I=E2=80=99ve seen some of the discussions on IRC about gpgscm.  However, it=
=E2=80=99s
not clear to me why we should make it a separate package.  AIUI, it=E2=80=
=99s
meant as a purely GnuPG-internal tool, and as such it may evolve in
lockstep with the rest of the GnuPG code base.

So I=E2=80=99d be tempted to keep it internal to GnuPG, unless upstream dec=
ides
to make it a separate package (which seems unlikely; it may be come part
of libgpg-error, though.)

WDYT?

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.