Hi, Happy New Year! (if you are using a gregorian calendar based on the January 1srt reform)
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 at 20:09, Ricardo Wurmus <[email protected]> wrote: > “profile” is a tempting choice, but it’s treacherous because we might be > blinded by the glow of the implementation of environments as volatile > profiles. On the other hand: if we could also move some of the features > of the “package” sub-command under “profile” (e.g. those that relate to > the management of, well, profiles), that could be a winning move. If the new "guix profile" does more or less the same thing than the current "guix environment", then I find the word "profile" confusing because the concept of "profile" is not exactly the same elsewhere. However, if the current CLI is changed is a bit, for example splitting the current "guix package", then why not. I mean, let consider the new command 'profile' with subcommands: - guix profile new - guix profile list etc. i.e., managing the profiles as it has been recently described (sorry too lazy to correctly refer where, but e.g., this thread [1]). *and* with the subcommand 'create' or 'temporary' or <naming-is-hard>, i.e., "guix profile create" doing more or less what the current "guix environment" is doing. Wouaouw! It is far far away from the initial idea behind this thread. :-) [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2019-10/msg00565.html All the best, simon
