Leo Famulari (2016-08-18 23:43 +0300) wrote: > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 04:18:48PM +0100, Marius Bakke wrote: >> Marius Bakke <mba...@fastmail.com> writes: >> >> > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes: >> > >> >> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:05:16PM +0100, Marius Bakke wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I wasn't sure where to put this, so went with its own file. It does not >> >>> fully implement PCRE so pcre.scm seems inappropriate. Perhaps that could >> >>> be renamed to regex.scm or similar. >> >> >> >> The patch looks good, but please put it in regex.scm! But, I don't want >> >> to move all the regex packages into this new regex module. Perhaps tre, >> >> since it appears to have no users in our tree. >> > >> > Moved to regex.scm. Thanks! >> >> ..and here is a patch that moves tre.scm over as well. The code is >> unchanged apart from license: prefix. > > When moving packages around, all users of the package need to have their > module imports updated. Copyright attribution must be carefully handled. > And merging the various *-updates branches into master and vice versa > becomes more complicated and prone to error. > > I *think* this patch does it right. And it will really grate on my sense > of aesthetics to have both regex.scm and tre.scm. But, in general, do we > want to make this change? What does everyone think?
I agree that having both 'tre' and 're2' packages in "regex.scm" is the right thing. Also I think it would be good to move 'oniguruma' there. As for "pcre.scm", I would also move its content to "regex.scm". What about 'ghc-pcre-light'? It seems natural to keep it in the same file with 'pcre'/'pcre2' or should it stay in "haskell.scm"? But also there are regex libraries for various languages (like 'ghc-regex-posix', 'guile-irregex', 'perl-regexp-common'). I think these shouldn't be moved. -- Alex
