Am Donnerstag, dem 23.03.2023 um 09:06 +0100 schrieb Edouard Klein: > After a few months of experience, and positive feedback from my > clients, my question to you guys is: would you be interested in > mainlining this, or should I keep my development efforts separate in > my channel ? Having just dropped a series of "old-style" service procedures, I don't think that maintaining a separate API on the mainline is a good idea.
> I do think this API is easier than manipulating services, and > although extendable services are awesome and a very nifty piece of > engineering, they require quite a good knowledge of scheme and take a > while to be used to, while this new API, while way less powerful, > lowers the barrier to entry for newcomers. I see how this style (and a similar one that has already been shown for guix home) can improve configuration file clarity and that's a good thing. On the other hand, it looks like you currently have to manually craft a lot of the procedures that go into the -> syntax and that's... well, not so good. If we could enable this style easier – say if we made it so that define-configuration and service-type also emitted ready-to-use constructors to use with a keyword style at little extra cost other than compilation time, I think that'd be a net positive for everyone involved. Cheers
