"pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" writes: >> -@item @code{sway-configuration} (default: #f) >> -File-like object providing an additional Sway configuration >> file to be >> -prepended to the mandatory part of the configuration. >> +@item @code{sway-config} (default: @code{(plain-file >> "greetd-wlgreet-sway-config" "")}) >> +Extra configuration for sway to be included before executing >> greeter. > > Could you retain the name of the existing field > sway-configuration? > Using abbreviations is uncommon in Guix, I think, > [...] > Also sway-configuration is used in many examples in the Guix > manual. I'm not sure if it is so strict, there are a lot of places where 'config' is used. Is there a guideline for naming? On the other hand `sway-config` is used deliberately in order to distinguish it from `` under `(gnu home services sway)`. Also type of value here is not a fully blown serializable data structure, but a file like object having contents of `sway.config`. > but more importantly changes would need to go through a > deprecation > period with a news item and such, because the Guix API is stable > and > we have a deprecation policy. I don't think that it is worth it. IMHO `wlgreet` is not much in use, since it is broken for quite time. Is there a threshold for when we have to strictly complicate stuff with deprecation tools? >> +@item @code{wlgreet} (default: @code{wlgreet}) >> +The package with the @command{/bin/wlgreet} command. >> + >> +@item @code{wlgreet-config} (default: >> @code{(greetd-wlgreet-configuration)}) >> +Configuration of @code{wlgreet} represented by >> @code{greetd-wlgreet-configuration}. > > For analogy, I would name this wlgreet-configuration. That could be done if necessary.