[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Distro name

From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: Distro name
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 22:42:22 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.130005 (Ma Gnus v0.5) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux)

Dmitri Paduchikh <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> The (distro ...) name for modules of the distro wasn’t meant to last.
>> Initially, I thought we could find a name for the distro, and substitute
>> that name to “distro”.  Possible names:
>>   • Jinn, as in “Jinn is not Nixpkgs/NixOS”;
>>   • Guixotic, as Guix + Exotic (suggested by RMS).
> These seem rather baroque to me. Especially the reference to nixpkgs in
> such a context. The name "Unix" is pretty much widespread so the
> abbreviation "GNU" can be seen as ingenious. nixpkgs is much less known
> and hence this looks weird, IMHO.

Right, but the meaning doesn’t have to be explained all the time,
esp. since jinn is also a noun.

> I would propose Guix World as a externally visible name, and just world
> or distro for internal namespace usage.


>> However, I’ve come to think that we don’t necessarily need a separate
>> name for the distro, but we do need a name for the module name space.
> It would be good to have name for distro. How would you refer to it
> otherwise?


>> The obvious solution would be (gnu ...).  There’d be modules like
>> (gnu packages openssl), which does not mean that OpenSSL is a GNU
>> package, but I think that should be clear in this context.  Anyway,
>> that’s the option that I like the most currently.
> It may be clear, but your example demonstrates internal inconsistency of
> such naming. Is Guix intended for GNU software only? If not, then be
> fair to all the others. ;)

The Guile module name space is different from the actual software names,
so I’m not too worried actually.

Thanks for your feedback!


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]