Ludovic Courtès (2016-05-08 19:51 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: > >> I should have asked this when emacs-build-system was introduced. Why >> does it put emacs packages in sub-directories of >> "/share/emacs/site-lisp/guix.d"? It looks more natural to me just to >> use "/share/emacs/site-lisp". >> >> I don't see any potential conflicts here: some packages will put their >> elisp files right in the site-lisp dir (gnu-build-system does it by >> default), and emacs-build-system can just use >> "/share/emacs/site-lisp/<package>" sub-directories. >> >> "guix.d" seems redundant to me. What do people think? > > I think there was a Good Reason™. Isn’t it that we wanted to mimic what > package.el does, while avoiding collisions with package.el-installed > software?
Yes, the Good Reason was to avoid potential collisions of thousands of emacs packages. I probably wasn't clear enough, I just wanted to say that "guix.d" part of a package file name can be removed. I suggest this: .../share/emacs/site-lisp/<package> instead of this (currently used): .../share/emacs/site-lisp/guix.d/<package> I can work on a patch for this change, if it sounds reasonable. -- Alex
