name conflicts with “guix process”

name conflicts with “guix process”

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Hi,

one of the interesting ideas that the GWL enables is that the people who
*use* processes don’t need to be the ones who created them.  A user
could install a bunch of process definitions (by having them on
GUIX_WORKFLOW_PATH) and run them with “guix process” or combine them in
a custom workflow.

Unfortunately, this doesn’t scale so well, as processes provided by
different people may very well have the same names.

Does it make sense to expose processes at the user interface?  Or should
processes really only ever be used in the context of workflows?  A user
could still combine processes to a custom workflow, but the composition
would be done by writing a workflow definition and using the modules
that provide the processes.

This means that we could get rid of a top-level “guix process” and
subsume the remaining features under a single “guix workflow” command.
There could be a “guix workflow --list-processes” command that lists
processes, their description, and their module name.

What are your thoughts on this?

--
Ricardo

Re: name conflicts with “guix process”

[zimoun]

Hi Ricardo,

>From my opinion, `guix process' is to close to `guix processes';
speaking about UI.
The UI that you propose to access to information of processes appears
to me better.

All the best,
simon