Re: How to get the package metadata as structured data?

[Catonano <catonano@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2380 bytes --]

2016-08-10 14:52 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>:

>
> Catonano <catonano@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > 2016-08-10 13:46 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>:
> >
> >>
> >> Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > David Craven <david@craven.ch> wrote:
> >> >> I aborted, since I realised that guix package -s doesn't include the
> >> >> source url and hash, which would be important for a testsuite...
> >> >
> >> > IMHO, if the rec data is the only way to get to the packages data, the
> >> > source url would be rather essential to get in.
> >>
> >> The recutils output is not the *only* way to access the package data.
> >> All packages in Guix are just Scheme variables.  Package data are
> >> available as S-expressions and can be read by Scheme programs or parsed
> >> by external applications.  The recutils output is just an additional
> >> format used when interacting with Guix on the command line.
> >>
> >> (Personally, I’m not enthusiastic about adding a serialised form of the
> >> source field to the recutils output.)
> >>
> >> ~~ Ricardo
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Not so long ago, someone posted a script that produced a web page with
> the
> > results of linting all the packages
> >
> > That's an example
> >
> > One could produce an xml file to be imported in Gephi, just to make
> another
> > example.
> >
> > Or a SQL text file to be imported in some relational db, or a different
> > format to be imported in some not relational db...
>
> I understand that it may be useful.  I just think that the
> representation as a Guile Scheme expression/value is *already* much more
> useful.  That’s what made “guix web” possible, a web interface like this
> one:
>
>     http://guix.mdc-berlin.de



Yes, Ricardo, I was not disagreeing with you. I was just trying to offer
Philippe some more perspective.

In fact I believe that the approach you envisioned (a cycle through the
packages values, leaving only the decompress phase and adding a phase that
calls Philippe's tool) has its merits.

Only, if I was Philippe, I would regret storing the output in the store

I'd prefer to be able to store the output in the regular file system

In this regard, I think that the threads about pipelines (for reproducible
science), some time ago, were quite interesting

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3353 bytes --]