George Clemmer <myg...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2018. aug. 30., Cs, 21:14):
> > Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> writes: > > > Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> I think “Guix System” is OK. > > > > I think so too. > > I recommend against renaming GuixSD >> "Guix System". Here is Why: > > 1) A noob would expect "guix system" to refer to the whole Guix > enchilada. If we use it to refer to GuixSD, a specific Guix deployment > mode, we have created a new, counter-intuitive thing we have to explain. > > 2) As Ricardo points out below, the "guix system" command clashes with > this use of Guix system. This is a second counter-intuitive thing we > would have to explain. > > Bottom line: we shouln'd use the general term "Guix System" in any way > beyond, perhaps in a descriptway way, e.g., The Guix project develops > the Guix System, a set of tools that manage software environments. > > >> Most of the time we’ll just say “Guix”, as > >> is already the case, and when we need to disambiguate (for instance when > >> addressing bugs), we’ll ask “Are you using Guix System?” or “Are you > >> using the Guix distro?”, and everything will be fine. :-) > > > > Exactly. > > > > I wrote this on IRC: > > > > The name “GuixSD” is opaque and creates an arbitrary distinction between > > the system running on bare metal and the systems you can create with the > > “guix system” commands. It makes it difficult to communicate about > > Guix. Do we really offer “a package manager” and a “distro” — or is it > > really all one thing with various levels? > > > > The “guix system” command can be used without GuixSD to create Guix > > virtual machines or containers. Describing “guix system” is difficult > > when we think in terms of “package manager” vs “distro”. Guix itself is > > also a distro – none of the packages it provides link with the host > > system, and the collection of packages is a distribution of free > > software. > > > > I think that simplifying the name by using “guix” as a category will > > make communication easier. > > > >> The motivation for this name change is that “SD” is obscure to most, as > >> you note, plus it creates confusion when people visit the web site: the > >> web site has a “GuixSD” logo, but then it talks about features of the > >> package manager. Designating the whole tool set as “Guix” will simplify > >> this, and we can always be more specific when we need to. > > > > I agree. > > I agree too. You may recall that I recommendi this approach when we > discussed the web site in January. That thread includes a product > description [1] that might be a good place to start when describing the > "whole tool set". > > [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-01/msg00457.html > > What do you think about GuixSD >> "Guix Distribution"? This naming seems to resolve the ambiguities mentioned so far, and has a widespread use, that exactly matches the intended meaning. WDYT?
