From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1gZjzx-0004C6-7I for mharc-gwl-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:07:25 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57790) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gZjzv-0004Bw-53 for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:07:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gZjzr-0000vs-3r for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:07:23 -0500 References: <87zht1rz30.fsf@elephly.net> From: Roel Janssen Message-ID: <95b6b274-d1bc-b0b2-543d-3ceb91e85d1e@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 23:07:11 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87zht1rz30.fsf@elephly.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: Moving GWL modules List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org On 19-12-18 22:22, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Hi Roel, > > I’m interested in moving the GWL modules to their own namespace to avoid > potential clashes with future versions of Guix. Currently, GWL modules > share the “(guix …)” and “(gnu …)” namespaces. > > I think it would be clearer to move all but the scripts (which extend > Guix) to “(gwl …)”. I like this change. So the new modules would be: (gwl processes) and (gwl workflows) Could we keep (guix processes) and (guix workflows) for backwards compatibility? At least for now, so we don't break existing workflows right away. > On a related note: I can never remember if a procedure is defined in > “(gnu workflows)” or “(guix workflows)”. Do you have a mnemonic? Is > this separation necessary or would it be fine to rearrange things? It's fine to rearrange things. I mimic'd the modules for Guix's packages ((guix packages) and (gnu packages)). Kind regards, Roel Janssen