Hi, EuAndreh <e...@euandre.org> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > >> Yes, I think it is clear that we’d have to do this using all the tools >> at our disposal, including time. >> >> Konrad’s objection remains though: existing documents (papers, blog >> posts, MOOCs, etc.) that mention ‘guix environment’ would all of a >> sudden become wrong if we were to change the defaults of ‘guix >> environment’. Even if we introduce a variable to restore the old >> behavior. >> >> Perhaps that’s unavoidable in the long run, but perhaps this is not the >> right time for this. > > Wouldn't having a new name for the new behaviour avoid breakage in this > situation? Yes, that’s correct (that’s also one of the suggestions Konrad made). We could take that route. What would we call it, though? I don’t like “guix shell” because it doesn’t quite reflect what the command is about. No good idea, though. Thanks, Ludo’.
