From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71)
	id 1goQXu-0001K9-8S
	for mharc-gwl-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:23:10 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52367)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>) id 1goQXr-0001JP-S7
	for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:23:09 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>) id 1goQXr-00054A-3L
	for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:23:07 -0500
Received: from mail-qk1-x741.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::741]:44324)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>)
	id 1goQXq-00052z-Uz
	for gwl-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:23:07 -0500
Received: by mail-qk1-x741.google.com with SMTP id o8so11142807qkk.11
	for <gwl-devel@gnu.org>; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 02:23:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <87bm40qta0.fsf@elephly.net>
In-Reply-To: <87bm40qta0.fsf@elephly.net>
From: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:22:54 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJ3okZ2wPOLJgR=d2J_1=SM7=F06pR1++nN4_BNdvsTWWr+3Sw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: support for containers
List-Id: <gwl-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/gwl-devel>,
	<mailto:gwl-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gwl-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:gwl-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gwl-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gwl-devel>,
	<mailto:gwl-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Cc: gwl-devel@gnu.org

Hi Ricardo,

On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 at 00:08, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:

> the GWL could already support execution in containers with this patch:

Nice !


> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> diff --git a/gwl/processes.scm b/gwl/processes.scm
> index b7251db..9ec5925 100644
> --- a/gwl/processes.scm
> +++ b/gwl/processes.scm
> @@ -19,13 +19,20 @@

[...]

> -(define (procedure->gexp process)
> +(define* (procedure->gexp process #:key (container? #t))
>    "Transform the procedure of PROCESS to a G-expression or return the
>  plain S-expression."

Why the default is #t ?


> The directories to be mounted in the container are derived from the
> declared inputs and outputs.  The only problem is that inputs are
> read-only in this implementation.  I like it this way, actually, but it
> means that the extended example workflow won=E2=80=99t work as it tries t=
o
> delete its inputs.
>
> Should data inputs be declared as (mutable-file =E2=80=A6) or (file =E2=
=80=A6) instead
> of being plain strings?

Hum? I am not sure that it should a good design to declare inputs as mutabl=
e.


All the best,
simon