Note that we are mostly discussing dependency lists when writing a
package

(inputs
 (list adwaita-icon-theme
       bash-minimal
       libadwaita
       (librsvg-for-system)
       gtk
       guile-3.0
       guile-g-golf))

and the style of Guix source code.  On the CLI,

guix shell --no-grafts g-golf gtk guile

is possible at this time without warning or discouragement, although on
equal terms with

guix shell --no-grafts guile-g-golf gtk guile

"Leo Famulari" <leo@famulari.name> writes:
> And really, what's so bad about naming the package of the g-golf
> program "g-golf"? We've deviated from these informal guidelines before
> and the world kept turning.

gtk is named gtk, not libgtk, although gtk does have binaries, too.

GTK 3 library clutter is named clutter, not libclutter, so you have a
point there.

Is Leo right, that we deviate frequently and with precedent?  If so, my
standing in for the policy crumbles.  Better change the name now than
later.

Other opinions?

Preliminary diff attached.  This reverts:

commit 694e31723788d811d026a047c9dea8e0d735362c
Author: Zhu Zihao <all_but_last@163.com>
Date:   Thu Feb 3 22:35:10 2022 +0800

    gnu: Deprecate the 'g-golf' variable.
    
    g-golf now supports both Guile 3.0 and 2.2. Assign a new name to identify
    the g-golf for different Guile version.
    
    * gnu/packages/guile-xyz.scm (g-golf): Rename to guile-g-golf.
    (g-golf): Define as deprecated by guile-g-golf.
    
    Signed-off-by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>


Regards,
Florian