Mark H Weaver (2017-06-06 16:47 -0400) wrote: > Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Mark H Weaver (2017-06-04 20:15 -0400) wrote: >> >>>> +(define-public s >>>> + (let ((commit "6604341edb3a775ff94415762af3ee9bd86bfb3c") >>>> + (revision "1")) >>>> + (package >>>> + (name "s") >>>> + (version (string-append "0.0.0-" revision "." (string-take commit >>>> 7))) >>> >>> I think we should rename this package and variable name to 's-shell' or >>> something along those lines. 's' is commonly used as a local variable >>> name. Single character variable names are in short supply, and I don't >>> think we should allocate them to packages. >>> >>> Thoughts? >> >> And what about "r" package? > > Ah, I had forgotten about 'r'. Thanks for reminding me :) > > I think we can make an exception for a package as firmly established and > widely used as 'r'. It's already been in Guix for a long time, and > there are hundreds of packages based on it. > > However, 's' has not yet had any releases, and as with any highly > experimental new program, chances are quite slim that it will ever gain > a non-trivial number of users. That's nothing personal, it's just a > simple fact about new projects: the overwhelming majority of new > projects never gain traction. > > Do we really want to permanently allocate to it one of the 25 remaining > lowercase ASCII single-letter names? That's prime real-estate in the > space of possible names. Frankly, I think it's hubris for someone to > claim one of those names for their experimental new project. Do we want > to set a precedent that anyone can grab one of those single-character > names for their pet project, regardless of whether it has any users > besides its author? > >> In my opinion, package names for "r" and "s" should stay the same – I >> think these names are expected by users. As for the variable names, >> they may be renamed, if it is needed. > > I can understand that point of view. Recently, someone named their new > package 'ao'. We simply weren't able to give it that name in Guix, > because we already have a package named 'ao' in Guix. > > If only 26 people in the entire world choose to give their project a > two-letter name, then the chances are good that there will be a > collision (c.f. birthday paradox), and one of them will need to be > renamed. > > Likewise, if only 5 people in the world choose a single-letter name, > then chances are good that there will be a collision. Who here has the > hubris to choose one of those names? Do we want to enable that?
Thanks for this descriptive answer! Now I understand your position and I agree with it :-) BTW, I've just recalled that there are "s" and "f" emacs packages (we named them "emacs-s" and "emacs-f", of course). -- Alex
