From unknown Wed Jun 25 03:53:38 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#22587 <22587@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#22587 <22587@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: "guix edit" name may be confusing Reply-To: bug#22587 <22587@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 10:53:38 +0000 retitle 22587 "guix edit" name may be confusing reassign 22587 guix submitter 22587 myglc2 severity 22587 normal tag 22587 wontfix thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 07 13:04:45 2016 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2016 18:04:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37432 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThV-00047K-AE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:45 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56073) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThU-000478-47 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:44 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThO-0006Sw-2k for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:38 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:59035) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThO-0006Ss-04 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:38 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47028) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThM-00085L-Sz for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThJ-0006Rp-MX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:36 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:37214) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThJ-0006Re-Fw for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:33 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSThH-0003wU-1y for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:04:31 +0100 Received: from c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([73.167.118.254]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:04:31 +0100 Received: from myglc2 by c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:04:31 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bug-guix@gnu.org From: myglc2 Subject: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:40 -0500 Lines: 31 Message-ID: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:3oSzFCXB9t+mt8IJVuwe4GtdEEg= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) Alex Kost writes: [...] > The purpose of "M-x guix-edit" Emacs command (and "guix edit" shell > command) is just to show you the source code of the package. This > source is usually placed in the store, and you shouldn't edit it. If > you are going to contribute to guix, (info "(guix) Building from Git") > is the right way. >From guix INFO: 6.2 Invoking ‘guix edit’ [...] launches the program specified in the ‘VISUAL’ or in the ‘EDITOR’ environment variable to edit the recipe of GCC 4.8.4 and that of Vim." TYPO: "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or "examine". RENAME: Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the case. The functions should be given a more informative and accurate name, such as: 'guix view', 'guix inspect', or 'guix examine'. MODE CHANGE: In emacs, read-only .scm files should be opened in view-mode. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 07 13:58:27 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2016 18:58:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37474 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUXT-0005P8-Pd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:58:27 -0500 Received: from mailrelay2.public.one.com ([91.198.169.125]:13220) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUXS-0005Ov-Sb for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:58:27 -0500 X-HalOne-Cookie: 92869b39c5adc90d8ca4f72dbf3d8f51a9ef2e6e X-HalOne-ID: c0a02d2d-cdcc-11e5-917b-b82a72d03b9b DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=enge.fr; s=20140924; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to: references; bh=Hkxn3uAgJW3+QtzUpLrzyYlUixzMQBIhfldn7Lp5n0Q=; b=iNZ45ooA/+7cN/h38AMQeV7V9Kh11tWmbwK5G3kARixbMsjSGFpIK2NRPZFTNnWvmvf+f+dQPA2BL FwehoJmCcA1PjTSeiTrLsq15HukQOFNU3B8/O50ko2Wotqvdg6jU66not+xqsGXV4xb6U6IIAaK5dO w0SP+xTdmAGzIHFw= Received: from debian (unknown [92.89.73.211]) by smtpfilter2.public.one.com (Halon Mail Gateway) with ESMTPSA; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 18:58:17 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 19:58:12 +0100 From: Andreas Enge To: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl0?= =?utf-8?B?4oCZICYg4oCYTS14?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change Message-ID: <20160207185812.GA24466@debian> References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 01:04:40PM -0500, myglc2 wrote: > TYPO: > "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or > "examine". > RENAME: > Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the > user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the > case. This depends on the user's rights. In a global installation, root is allowed to modify. In a git checkout, one would need to do "./pre-inst-env guix edit" like with all other guix commands. Andreas From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 07 14:22:44 2016 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2016 19:22:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37487 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUuy-0005yJ-Dv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:44 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44523) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUuw-0005y6-A6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:42 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUuq-000816-E9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:37 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:33571) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUuq-000812-B1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:36 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35476) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUup-0000zp-DD for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:36 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUuk-0007xc-D4 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:35 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:40318) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUuk-0007wr-6E for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:30 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSUui-0006UA-0o for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 20:22:28 +0100 Received: from c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([73.167.118.254]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 20:22:28 +0100 Received: from myglc2 by c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 20:22:28 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bug-guix@gnu.org From: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:22:36 -0500 Lines: 26 Message-ID: <87y4awiav7.fsf@gmail.com> References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <20160207185812.GA24466@debian> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8WfX2F1QC6/SxGmYEh22PJLWddA= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) Andreas Enge writes: > On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 01:04:40PM -0500, myglc2 wrote: >> TYPO: >> "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or >> "examine". >> RENAME: >> Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the >> user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the >> case. > > This depends on the user's rights. In a global installation, root is allowed > to modify. In a git checkout, one would need to do "./pre-inst-env guix edit" > like with all other guix commands. > > Andreas Of course, running as root, 'guix edit' opens the recipe read-only and from there, root can do whatever he/she likes. But, AIUI, this goes against the guix concept of an immutable store. To describe and name this function to imply that one could/should edit recipes in the store based on the "corner case" of root having the ultimable ability to do so seems counter to how you would want to encourage even a root user to proceed. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 07 14:34:58 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2016 19:34:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37501 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSV6o-0006GY-LR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:34:58 -0500 Received: from mailrelay6.public.one.com ([91.198.169.200]:50947) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSV6n-0006GL-00 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 14:34:57 -0500 X-HalOne-Cookie: f8874df0c57da084c63648ec6835ddeeb3d5b691 X-HalOne-ID: da77c996-cdd1-11e5-a8c0-b82a72d06996 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=enge.fr; s=20140924; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to: references; bh=w4BYzTPP2gruFKciO1PoVAzv51a1EH7QjM4D0y1Iv/Y=; b=Sw3sgSOvdNKuusDQj7uSgpCkrC+nXvYb1E5Hwe2z0jW/6xU7DMgsRqnXj61R2xg6GbWD6Y8o4uLkA OaNmS7Yvou/d7CMyIDrqBu+2Db4CWh4uoGzrWY5leCwfBdO43sf+WKWmSX2wqs+BPU3IDT8PqzIOCk opdIptVksikUm6DQ= Received: from debian (unknown [92.89.73.211]) by smtpfilter3.public.one.com (Halon Mail Gateway) with ESMTPSA; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 19:34:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 20:34:45 +0100 From: Andreas Enge To: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl0?= =?utf-8?B?4oCZICYg4oCYTS14?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change Message-ID: <20160207193445.GA26755@debian> References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <20160207185812.GA24466@debian> <87y4awiav7.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y4awiav7.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 02:22:36PM -0500, myglc2 wrote: > But, AIUI, this goes against the guix concept of an immutable store. > To describe and name this function to imply that one could/should edit > recipes in the store based on the "corner case" of root having the > ultimable ability to do so seems counter to how you would want to > encourage even a root user to proceed. Recipes are not in the store. For instance, after doing a "make install", they are in $PREFIX/share/guile/site/2.0/. Or maybe they are in the store after a "guix pull"? I am only using the "make install" version for a system-wide installation, and a git checkout for making more recent recipes available to one user. Andreas From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Feb 07 15:26:46 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Feb 2016 20:26:46 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37536 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSVuv-0007Va-Uf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 15:26:46 -0500 Received: from mail-qg0-f53.google.com ([209.85.192.53]:34953) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSVuu-0007VN-90 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 15:26:44 -0500 Received: by mail-qg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id y89so31416491qge.2 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:26:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=xXrTPNDyu7bZ/lVDpN4Hvy0SB7MGtMWb2O6FLcYNHhY=; b=j3mKmSBN5PkTMYQePVDaA2Gk40MWBZ8w05VslrxJ/C5eitMK4poYpU5JGAseTIzoiW 7nRls75JSCqVfoyMOPycrMWq5BnkcWcQkjWK647/w36nghf/H+eypKvKL6XCl/b/5vHF rNijsdkBXOgRC2K6Sq+UvSVppC5TTxQxaUc2OcKWoukkZEun0uRGbjU/MyxSJ7cjZhAL Movv7qdzu9qlCifyTznojJoPdqcHlvIlH3UfZhrN/nWY+M4C4nxE7v84e9NXF7zk79KP cZvdr253akft+Mabu012Nr9/JuR9WXOh1F+NjFuvr+N1IBx5DxkVl94/lRwZvB3X/mFy 6sIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=xXrTPNDyu7bZ/lVDpN4Hvy0SB7MGtMWb2O6FLcYNHhY=; b=jSpd+fIgxBBAna9VrdYYh6pdOfChnrVgjewMtcq8EroOGTuh+no0qmLE2WXOY10BMB Etx+R22bKuinehJ1b6JaGAVvqDMs3RqefHnLfzY8r461YIbEUa7eEP/cql3LctkF7eti ICa7zgvrrUFFIEcxSmfarwQ8D6OA/hJZXbqAUBm6Hktm5knB1KNkUr7RkR6Kc2yAnL2W ZvbtK62At8dgm0hAAn+Elm9dpfZeVR8cAo9IIPrsS2SgHafi8DMpO7nFg7Tot307X47t /ohQxlgF2EQ3vsLCVDhoCzM8Sf+I95rzTjTRj5UldKyC0RRbm9JDoMkzgnrp60YW5oed 2N5g== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQ6T1CprN6rEs5gIfp4gOcknr81o4TrxZL/ta/lCl/pHnux/EBvsB8ZZoTNXnLzcA== X-Received: by 10.140.176.19 with SMTP id w19mr31900668qhw.59.1454876798954; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:26:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from g1 (c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [73.167.118.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e92sm12485797qge.19.2016.02.07.12.26.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:26:38 -0800 (PST) From: myglc2 To: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <20160207185812.GA24466@debian> <87y4awiav7.fsf@gmail.com> <20160207193445.GA26755@debian> Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 15:26:55 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20160207193445.GA26755@debian> (Andreas Enge's message of "Sun, 7 Feb 2016 20:34:45 +0100") Message-ID: <87twlki7w0.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) Andreas Enge writes: > On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 02:22:36PM -0500, myglc2 wrote: >> But, AIUI, this goes against the guix concept of an immutable store. >> To describe and name this function to imply that one could/should edit >> recipes in the store based on the "corner case" of root having the >> ultimable ability to do so seems counter to how you would want to >> encourage even a root user to proceed. > > Recipes are not in the store. For instance, after doing a "make install", > they are in $PREFIX/share/guile/site/2.0/. > > Or maybe they are in the store after a "guix pull"? > > I am only using the "make install" version for a system-wide installation, > and a git checkout for making more recent recipes available to one user. > > Andreas On guixSD they are found under /root/.config/guix/latest which points, for example, into the store like this: latest -> /gnu/store/96s6sh92xyw0rljp3w1zxc8h3s4vb5zf-guix-latest So it seems to me that editing these files will essenctially "corrupt" a guix system. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Feb 08 03:34:56 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Feb 2016 08:34:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37939 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aShHc-0001CQ-Aw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 03:34:56 -0500 Received: from mail-lf0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]:34281) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aShHZ-0001CC-Uj for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 03:34:54 -0500 Received: by mail-lf0-f43.google.com with SMTP id j78so90627685lfb.1 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:34:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mov0Ughx40S5Mpd/+T9cgKjKdToe/2e3/ulyqjFFl1U=; b=SIoGanWvZO5jc8bT5mer4q9uPfcoT5JD3sSajX3aCqxRLMQyk1kpGvWbiG7HQcIAd9 YCdQ4QNMAfvcbQZkiUFb+vWJM4EiSQec5sNAjPIE/3iZBIz7ELkIANVGWqQH323hci4C LmdpnVMyMz1X/bM9MTGc6vqIU8mrgmiE1ZBdsaItbZwCkOk0yzxtmzkRZ2MU9a83WEO8 SFO4OGzNYwLQLWIJur98S21xoqoOIDOAN2RXSY7baLCJYWEGQ7vftEMpkzAwABySQr11 so68adJNcBGI4kPN3vSNSNFqy/EGUZPEI/rW/PfQYWPwVTCajSxY75h1hVkiYzTupNAo PGlQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mov0Ughx40S5Mpd/+T9cgKjKdToe/2e3/ulyqjFFl1U=; b=igEn6s9CAfUk2oFpGmCuefcy7NELYsDQtS0pw/2FhYgUP3mSs7xTJyTyesqQ0iYECT do2eouc9sGNbCQjmMdC16hs0x5Jp5t7D+RVBUxDHCnWQk1+T8ICyZohInfoAGi1JR5Il oYKO5A3ZczOCluFVIHLj5i2eu848kyINl+BUtaaoUFUU9YABgXfyZXHhIThZmJqSwTih 1kv1ZuiEDo0oT8G54LeXSjiV4i/Lgqe+HSj/BxITF4xkuel6zLeMqI7KLxWmO3Wmr1+F Kn/vU7XwZYRU3N9GP3ExTXo0/J6GRqhEvzLyKbKPEt/dVBsNE3ugvYLjNgGGEPlgUc2N HsYg== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOToVKkp6+pgUWL6K2xd5L8qZBbib66TJlzvNP7EjAwptR0faIfjblgKH6ceAvCrRw== X-Received: by 10.25.169.74 with SMTP id s71mr9738446lfe.128.1454920488050; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x5sm3815923lbb.30.2016.02.08.00.34.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:34:47 -0800 (PST) From: Alex Kost To: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 11:34:47 +0300 In-Reply-To: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> (myglc2@gmail.com's message of "Sun, 07 Feb 2016 13:04:40 -0500") Message-ID: <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) myglc2 (2016-02-07 21:04 +0300) wrote: > From guix INFO: > > 6.2 Invoking =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 > [...] > launches the program specified in the =E2=80=98VISUAL=E2=80=99 or in the = =E2=80=98EDITOR=E2=80=99 > environment variable to edit the recipe of GCC 4.8.4 and that of Vim." > > TYPO: > > "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or > "examine". Just to mention - I like "edit" name :-) > RENAME: > > Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the > user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the > case. The functions should be given a more informative and accurate > name, such as: 'guix view', 'guix inspect', or 'guix examine'. Along with the package recipes that come with Guix, a user can also have his/her own packages (specified using GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH env var), and "guix edit my-super-package" opens a user's file with this package. It is highly likely that this file is editable, so "guix edit" is a perfect name in this case I think. IMO it's a user responsibility to understand what files can be edited and what cannot. But I agree that this may be confusing, so maybe we should clarify the manual to explain in (info "(guix) Invoking guix edit") that store files must not be edited. > MODE CHANGE: > > In emacs, read-only .scm files should be opened in view-mode. I don't agree. For example, when you open "/etc/hosts" (or whatever) file in Emacs, you get a message: Note: file is write protected which indicates that it is opened read-only, but view-mode is not used by default. You can enable it manually if you wish. The same thing happens with package files. --=20 Alex From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Feb 08 13:26:35 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Feb 2016 18:26:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60402 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqWB-00013N-5v for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:26:35 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43544) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqIG-0000b7-L8 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:12:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSnlz-0007Yg-6t for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 10:30:47 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:59709) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSnlz-0007Yb-2t; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 10:30:43 -0500 Received: from pluto.bordeaux.inria.fr ([193.50.110.57]:36370 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aSnlx-0000n5-L5; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 10:30:42 -0500 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Alex Kost Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 20 =?utf-8?Q?Pluvi=C3=B4se?= an 224 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x3D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:30:39 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Mon, 08 Feb 2016 11:34:47 +0300") Message-ID: <878u2vfcdc.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.3 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org, myglc2 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.3 (-----) Alex Kost skribis: > myglc2 (2016-02-07 21:04 +0300) wrote: [...] >> Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the >> user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the >> case. The functions should be given a more informative and accurate >> name, such as: 'guix view', 'guix inspect', or 'guix examine'. > > Along with the package recipes that come with Guix, a user can also have > his/her own packages (specified using GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH env var), and > "guix edit my-super-package" opens a user's file with this package. It > is highly likely that this file is editable, so "guix edit" is a perfect > name in this case I think. IMO it's a user responsibility to understand > what files can be edited and what cannot. I sympathize with the frustration of myglc2, but I agree with you Alex. > But I agree that this may be confusing, so maybe we should clarify the > manual to explain in (info "(guix) Invoking guix edit") that store files > must not be edited. Yes. Can one of you propose a way to phrase it? I also had in mind that =E2=80=98someday=E2=80=99 we could have: guix edit --clone foo which would automatically open, say, ~/.config/guix/personal/packages.scm with a template like: (define-module (personal packages) #:use-module (guix packages) #:use-module (gnu packages foo)) (define-public my-foo (package (inherit foo) (name "foo-personal"))) It=E2=80=99s a bit of work, but it=E2=80=99d be nice. Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Feb 08 13:28:51 2016 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Feb 2016 18:28:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60437 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqYM-00019Y-Mo for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:50 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50258) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqYL-00019J-27 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:49 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqYE-0004z7-QN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:43 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:34809) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqYE-0004z0-NI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:42 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41197) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqYD-0005cx-Au for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:42 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqY9-0004xW-81 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:41 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:33988) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqY8-0004xO-T6 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:28:37 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqY7-0004ow-4L for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:28:35 +0100 Received: from c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([73.167.118.254]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:28:35 +0100 Received: from myglc2 by c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:28:35 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bug-guix@gnu.org From: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:29:10 -0500 Lines: 136 Message-ID: <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:+J8X5y2kW/JQ33t4ky4GopvGGgU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) Alex Kost writes: > myglc2 (2016-02-07 21:04 +0300) wrote: > >> From guix INFO: >> >> 6.2 Invoking ‘guix edit’ >> [...] >> launches the program specified in the ‘VISUAL’ or in the ‘EDITOR’ >> environment variable to edit the recipe of GCC 4.8.4 and that of Vim." >> >> TYPO: >> >> "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or >> "examine". > > Just to mention - I like "edit" name :-) > >> RENAME: >> >> Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the >> user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the >> case. The functions should be given a more informative and accurate >> name, such as: 'guix view', 'guix inspect', or 'guix examine'. > > Along with the package recipes that come with Guix, a user can also have > his/her own packages (specified using GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH env var), and > "guix edit my-super-package" opens a user's file with this package. It > is highly likely that this file is editable, so "guix edit" is a perfect > name in this case I think. IMO it's a user responsibility to understand > what files can be edited and what cannot. > Sorry this is so long, but I think this is a useability issue that is worth discussing more. I understand your point-of-view, but I think it is much more packager-centric than you should plan on your ultimate user base being. If we think about the mix of guix users when it is more widely successful, as I strongly believe it will be, a majority (80-90%) will be "simply" managing and configuring their computer and/or user account. They will NOT make packages. If this is the case, the majority of people clicking on "guix edit" will not understand "what files can be edited and what cannot." The very idea that a recipe on their computer can make something they need will be a radical leap. For these people, taking the fist look at a guix recipe will be a step deeper into guix. Such a user's first interaction might run along the lines of mine ... - Hmm, I want to see an actual recipe. - Oh wow, it says I can edit a recipe right here! - Hmm, maybe I shouldn't because I don't want to break something. - But they wouldn't call it "guix edit" if it wasn't OK to change stuff, right? - OK, I'll give it a shot. I'll look at something I am familiar with ... - 'guix edit screen' - WOW look at that. Finds the recipe, opens an editor, COOL! - Hmm, I'mm make a little change, & see what happens. call-interactively: Buffer is read-only: # [18 times] - OK, it is actually not that obvious or easy to get out of emacs at this point even for emacs users (try it). Now, pretend you know nothing about emacs. What would you be thinking and experiencing? A non-emacs user might be thinking -- "Why is it beeping! Did I do something wrong! Is guix broken! ARGH! Let me out of this thing!" -- So I expect we have lost the emacs non-user right here, but me, I continued along ... - Oh yeah, its read-only. No problem, I'll do ‘C-x C-q’ - Now, change save it ... Saving file /gnu/store/24mbii9wjlyzfzsqwfmcvz6vz2fv5n6g-guix-0.9.0.c3f29bc/share/guile/site/2.0/gnu/packages/screen.scm... Cannot write backup file; backing up in ~/.emacs.d/%backup%~ Error: (file-error "Setting ACL" "read-only file system" "/gnu/store/24mbii9wjlyzfzsqwfmcvz6vz2fv5n6g-guix-0.9.0.c3f29bc/share/guile/site/2. Auto-saving... Auto-saving screen.scm: Opening output file: read-only file system, /gnu/store/24mbii9wjlyzfzsqwfmcvz6vz2fv5n6g-guix-0.9.0.c3f29bc/share/guile/site/2.0/gnu/packages/#screen.scm# Quit Auto-saving... Auto-saving screen.scm: Opening output file: read-only file system, /gnu/store/24mbii9wjlyzfzsqwfmcvz6vz2fv5n6g-guix-0.9.0.c3f29bc/share/guile/site/2.0/gnu/packages/#screen.scm# Quit - ARGH! I have no idea where else I should save this. Let me out of here 'C-g C-g C-g C-g C-g'!! - WHEW, that was unpleasant! - I must not be getting some big concept, I have to study the doc more. So, I guess I am just saying... Why point a new user taking their first look at a guix recipe down this alley? Can't we find a more user-friendly way to show them their first real recipe? > But I agree that this may be confusing, so maybe we should clarify the > manual to explain in (info "(guix) Invoking guix edit") that store files > must not be edited. > >> MODE CHANGE: >> >> In emacs, read-only .scm files should be opened in view-mode. > > I don't agree. For example, when you open "/etc/hosts" (or whatever) > file in Emacs, you get a message: > > Note: file is write protected > > which indicates that it is opened read-only, but view-mode is not used > by default. You can enable it manually if you wish. The same thing > happens with package files. Yes, of course, Emacs is a chainsaw. That is what we love about it. But I believe that, for the majority of your future guix users, you should think in terms of providing some protective gear and training wheels. Then you can use 'C-u' or something similar to empower the experienced user. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Apr 18 04:37:57 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2016 08:37:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38894 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1as4gu-000304-SC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 04:37:57 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f68.google.com ([209.85.215.68]:32824) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1as4gt-0002zs-0L for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 04:37:55 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f68.google.com with SMTP id p64so25245351lfg.0 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 01:37:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nIeeuEyBZMcuPzV5zXe/J515JqKHqPW2+sJxk2ecbRw=; b=ucnwFVBcUXto6UPvjKMMeuk/1/QKpxjeqA4KUCzarNutnihTQ9i6qwCjPGb4eHP0d3 PRSBHxnQOL8IEi5gQA6MjZAWER51GcfCHOYt5rftxJbztUf6WDcZTyfel1AcRpUhc6LI cLaU6yEfMw/BMH7f8+U2u+k3LNWaBzpAswUtncFOoa/wjKjAzmxKcBr5k2zkSMu/R/PJ VgQyHTLZ9E+36vXwIQo01uP8k8RDixsSdTaN51abAit8HkkOKmSIe9O8r2JDOzR11MPr hW/x303GIfrCH6mko51id3TmxrjomuXtUqzqXxo9O2aDZHN2hgNonrZfeqStW5xDXxnL u+vA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nIeeuEyBZMcuPzV5zXe/J515JqKHqPW2+sJxk2ecbRw=; b=SQn/ZuDv82aVTFURf6wwtJrz6GKbBhF5bSreIaNXuCTpomIg5Fi1Aus9z4IJIFakZA uURiYPpbFWaS67c72SbzO55Sc4TBSPs3VTtC6pk9+fRMFEyNn7R8g0iRF8T83oChx8tP dlKNUTPjPqd83KXi2XoeR0cngYo+JrKZxAXWJTbTwJXfVrhUUZdE8RXRMfFiiDMUGyyE 7OAo9MSATAKlvLtrgbBzI2MvMD5zSPn6/1FtGEoBUb2yY3wd8hiaWsafmWaeci8lPs7c c3mjBrcWqmnVTREcvGOPMXaKaHIajyDG8jrM8GoH2rBp/+MeWJuR8RzGRzBka/qtfmrK KixQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUBWPbgz4GF3hnbuDDkuAdpsBYHnqeD3EdXLVasMsrCOk+UCCkqxsT/ON/79AZ5zQ== X-Received: by 10.25.196.23 with SMTP id u23mr14206351lff.129.1460968669254; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 01:37:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h2sm3127337lbd.42.2016.04.18.01.37.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 01:37:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Kost To: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 11:37:48 +0300 In-Reply-To: <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> (myglc2@gmail.com's message of "Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:29:10 -0500") Message-ID: <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) myglc2 (2016-02-08 21:29 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost writes: > >> myglc2 (2016-02-07 21:04 +0300) wrote: >> >>> From guix INFO: >>> >>> 6.2 Invoking =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 >>> [...] >>> launches the program specified in the =E2=80=98VISUAL=E2=80=99 or in th= e =E2=80=98EDITOR=E2=80=99 >>> environment variable to edit the recipe of GCC 4.8.4 and that of Vim." >>> >>> TYPO: >>> >>> "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or >>> "examine". >> >> Just to mention - I like "edit" name :-) I changed my mind, I don't like it anymore :-( >>> RENAME: >>> >>> Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the >>> user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the >>> case. The functions should be given a more informative and accurate >>> name, such as: 'guix view', 'guix inspect', or 'guix examine'. >> >> Along with the package recipes that come with Guix, a user can also have >> his/her own packages (specified using GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH env var), and >> "guix edit my-super-package" opens a user's file with this package. It >> is highly likely that this file is editable, so "guix edit" is a perfect >> name in this case I think. IMO it's a user responsibility to understand >> what files can be edited and what cannot. > > Sorry this is so long, but I think this is a useability issue that is > worth discussing more. > > I understand your point-of-view, but I think it is much more > packager-centric than you should plan on your ultimate user base being. > > If we think about the mix of guix users when it is more widely > successful, as I strongly believe it will be, a majority (80-90%) will > be "simply" managing and configuring their computer and/or user > account. They will NOT make packages. > > If this is the case, the majority of people clicking on "guix edit" will > not understand "what files can be edited and what cannot." The very idea > that a recipe on their computer can make something they need will be a > radical leap. For these people, taking the fist look at a guix recipe > will be a step deeper into guix. > > Such a user's first interaction might run along the lines of mine ... > > - Hmm, I want to see an actual recipe. > > - Oh wow, it says I can edit a recipe right here! > > - Hmm, maybe I shouldn't because I don't want to break something. > > - But they wouldn't call it "guix edit" if it wasn't OK to change stuff, > right? > > - OK, I'll give it a shot. I'll look at something I am familiar with ... > > - 'guix edit screen' > > - WOW look at that. Finds the recipe, opens an editor, COOL! [...] Now I agree with this. There was another person=C2=B9 who was confused by "edit" name, and I think there will be more. OTOH if it will be renamed to anything else, I'm afraid some people will still think they can just modify the package definition in place. But "guix edit" is=E2=80=A6, well,= not the best name we can have. Moreover, I think there are inconsistencies in guix commands. For example, we have "guix system build" to build a system, but "guix build" to build a package. IMO "guix package build" would be a better choice. In general, I think it would be good to move package commands inside "guix package" (which is probably a different direction to Andy's suggestion=C2=B2), e.g, to make "guix package lint", "guix package size", etc. So, returning to "guix edit". I think any of: "view", "recipe", "definition" are better. I would prefer "guix package definition", not just "guix definition", as in future there may appear a way to "edit" other things. For example, I've sent a patchset=C2=B3 to go to license definitions in Emacs. So analogously we could have "guix license definition" (along with "guix license list" and similar). I realize that making subcommands for "guix package" and removing "guix graph", "guix lint" and other is radical, but I think it is the right way to organize package commands. =C2=B9 https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guix/2016-03-07#T948796 =C2=B2 http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-08/msg00044.html =C2=B3 http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-04/msg00721.html --=20 Alex From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Apr 18 13:41:28 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2016 17:41:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39629 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asDAu-0002rb-1j for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:41:28 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49195) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asDAs-0002rO-03 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:41:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asDAj-00044x-MH for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:41:20 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:52413) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asDAj-00044t-JI; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:41:17 -0400 Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]:43796 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1asDAi-0000d6-Vk; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 13:41:17 -0400 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Alex Kost Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 30 Germinal an 224 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x3D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:41:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Mon, 18 Apr 2016 11:37:48 +0300") Message-ID: <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org, myglc2 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) It seems to me that this bug has no clear purpose, or too broad a purpose, or something. Could you retitle it, or close it, or fix it, whichever is appropriate? :-) Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Apr 18 17:11:18 2016 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2016 21:11:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39709 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRx-0001Dj-Kq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:18 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51003) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRv-0001DX-Tz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRp-0001gk-4a for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:10 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:59262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRp-0001gT-16 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41900) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRn-0001NI-4L for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRj-0001dZ-PN for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:06 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:40008) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRj-0001ct-F5 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:11:03 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1asGRh-0000YH-N6 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:11:01 +0200 Received: from c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([73.167.118.254]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:11:01 +0200 Received: from myglc2 by c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:11:01 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bug-guix@gnu.org From: myglc2 Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:10:13 -0400 Lines: 171 Message-ID: <86fuuizkqy.fsf@gmail.com> References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-73-167-118-254.hsd1.ma.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:2A8zb507jEn4i2VoZrvMoljvHg4= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Alex Kost writes: > myglc2 (2016-02-08 21:29 +0300) wrote: > >> Alex Kost writes: >> >>> myglc2 (2016-02-07 21:04 +0300) wrote: >>> >>>> From guix INFO: >>>> >>>> 6.2 Invoking ‘guix edit’ >>>> [...] >>>> launches the program specified in the ‘VISUAL’ or in the ‘EDITOR’ >>>> environment variable to edit the recipe of GCC 4.8.4 and that of Vim." >>>> >>>> TYPO: >>>> >>>> "edit" (last line above) should be replaced with "view", "inspect", or >>>> "examine". >>> >>> Just to mention - I like "edit" name :-) > > I changed my mind, I don't like it anymore :-( Good to hear. >>>> RENAME: >>>> >>>> Calling these functions 'guix edit' and 'M-x guix-edit' implies that the >>>> user will be able to modify the recipe, but this is not actually the >>>> case. The functions should be given a more informative and accurate >>>> name, such as: 'guix view', 'guix inspect', or 'guix examine'. >>> >>> Along with the package recipes that come with Guix, a user can also have >>> his/her own packages (specified using GUIX_PACKAGE_PATH env var), and >>> "guix edit my-super-package" opens a user's file with this package. It >>> is highly likely that this file is editable, so "guix edit" is a perfect >>> name in this case I think. IMO it's a user responsibility to understand >>> what files can be edited and what cannot. >> >> Sorry this is so long, but I think this is a useability issue that is >> worth discussing more. >> >> I understand your point-of-view, but I think it is much more >> packager-centric than you should plan on your ultimate user base being. >> >> If we think about the mix of guix users when it is more widely >> successful, as I strongly believe it will be, a majority (80-90%) will >> be "simply" managing and configuring their computer and/or user >> account. They will NOT make packages. >> >> If this is the case, the majority of people clicking on "guix edit" will >> not understand "what files can be edited and what cannot." The very idea >> that a recipe on their computer can make something they need will be a >> radical leap. For these people, taking the fist look at a guix recipe >> will be a step deeper into guix. >> >> Such a user's first interaction might run along the lines of mine ... >> >> - Hmm, I want to see an actual recipe. >> >> - Oh wow, it says I can edit a recipe right here! >> >> - Hmm, maybe I shouldn't because I don't want to break something. >> >> - But they wouldn't call it "guix edit" if it wasn't OK to change stuff, >> right? >> >> - OK, I'll give it a shot. I'll look at something I am familiar with ... >> >> - 'guix edit screen' >> >> - WOW look at that. Finds the recipe, opens an editor, COOL! > [...] > > Now I agree with this. There was another person¹ who was confused by > "edit" name, and I think there will be more. OTOH if it will be renamed > to anything else, I'm afraid some people will still think they can just > modify the package definition in place. But "guix edit" is…, well, not > the best name we can have. > > Moreover, I think there are inconsistencies in guix commands. For > example, we have "guix system build" to build a system, but "guix build" > to build a package. IMO "guix package build" would be a better choice. > > In general, I think it would be good to move package commands inside > "guix package" (which is probably a different direction to Andy's > suggestion²), e.g, to make "guix package lint", "guix package size", > etc. For overall Guix usability, the overloading of a single guix command for everything is not so good. When you eventually create a man page, it will be intimidating for someone just trying to do per-user package management, which the majority of, and least sophisticated users, will be trying to do. On the other hand there are several "classes" of commands and this is reflected by the guix CLI being described in several logically different parts of the doc, but not, as you point out, by being differentiated in the CLI. A possibly better approach would be to explicitly split the guix command-verse into command classes to better match the structure of the doc. For example, per-user ('guix ...'), global-system ('guix-sys ...'), and developer ('guix-dev ...'), or something similar. Since the most frequently used commands will be per-user package management, I think you should replace 'guix package' with 'guix' and promote the non-package commands to be hyphenated (ALA, guix-daemon). This would, in turn, give rise to emacs functions something like: OLD NEW ------------------------------------------------------------------- user: guix-edit guix-view-definition guix-installed-packages guix-installed-packages guix-installed-user-packages NA admin: guix-installed-system-packages guix-sys-installed-packages developer: guix-hydra-build-list-latest-builds guix-dev-hydra-build-list-latest-builds guix-edit guix-dev-edit-definition While this would be not-so-nice for a power user, it would make it easier for a less experienced user to find a relevant command in the sea of 'M-x commands' in the *Completions* buffer. This kind of naming may not be typical for emacs, but I think it is probably justified considering the range of functionality currently provided by Guix. > So, returning to "guix edit". I think any of: "view", "recipe", > "definition" are better. I would prefer "guix package definition", > not just "guix definition", as in future there may appear a way to > "edit" other things. For example, I've sent a patchset³ to go to > license definitions in Emacs. So analogously we could have "guix > license definition" (along with "guix license list" and similar). The best choice is probably the term that is most consistent with the doc and (hopefully some-day-existent) glossary. Based on present usage "definition" has stronger support (and BTW, "recipe" needs to be replaced with definition in a few places). I actually think "recipe" is more intuitive and better connotes the idea of a formula for making a package. But if you use recipe you should also change "definition" to "recipe" where appropriate in the doc. The other thing to consider is emacs support for editing manifests, which are weakly documented and supported now, but would surely be nice to have. So maybe ultimately something like: user: guix view definition or guix view recipe guix edit manifest developer: guix-dev edit definition or guix-dev edit recipe > I realize that making subcommands for "guix package" and removing "guix > graph", "guix lint" and other is radical, but I think it is the right > way to organize package commands. > > ¹ https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guix/2016-03-07#T948796 > ² http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2015-08/msg00044.html > ³ http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-04/msg00721.html Maybe radical changes are needed. Much easier to do now than later ;-) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Apr 19 04:18:57 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Apr 2016 08:18:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39879 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asQs4-0001u9-Rs for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 04:18:56 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f68.google.com ([209.85.215.68]:33886) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asQs3-0001tp-Qo for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 04:18:56 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f68.google.com with SMTP id e190so1382896lfe.1 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:18:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=og0jIdWXLkjCIYiuTQZljoLNkkC27LGE6Go+25INPTA=; b=uGDNHOHwO4VpkVcnnvHVzPmfTPKdCUGBAev5nn2UXEdt2/BFvmj08BWZv1cxP+D9fE JzbX0zddEOZC+TwhYLreLWcH+RSd9DaaXu1y6DiywjSNUVIZLiZ2DQ4HlNf/IMcNLgxy iQ9KSs/wsT/GgFnX0VzuY4hq8JaIZgNSBDpimh4D9nQvAT7BSIO/wu7BqJkR/YjyBNFC kBmP+zPRQ4MNwtR94RF3YbvLyYnu9IFrcPh/035xSc/O2MIjEiCzZWqUgJlDT9iKe1Ps kooiR7Ea5ggavedMfUoiqELuwkwdfBARIsbxLcCZlWJZiqilup9naZYTxOCHNNCKotxo qM8g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=og0jIdWXLkjCIYiuTQZljoLNkkC27LGE6Go+25INPTA=; b=fsCtVve1VsMzX1uUvI13yG0GehnvrHvVcpQPc+VF5pbJqQemVoDktc6J5Gjp9yR38g woH/DfbD8LnIpw5Q9Z5bTZP3IOzKAYtQSqIX8Pve3/0uLl5Tg37xZrYJdiBXp90ElZBc G7KZ5H29051Ae7WdE+w598Ge1Fd6+j4g8eeCQr23tQS4EcaWNAOPqNsf6PRE36tmfHwS MVnfAfING/VEHq2KSLtV9pAqO43kv6o30qw3K6KjtIKuweHZXryexDRIYCj0b6s1QBZz LHhr96sg/F2mHu/9mLYT8yPsw2xX4Z0qT2cHO+6fhCIjPC3BaqeDzy4hiUbMfpukZegf oa7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWk9kk8CDlF72pMkOKjZvZcKUMOsc3gnOZLs2X/RlfQv2aIHGnJANvCP1fK7Ohlyg== X-Received: by 10.112.227.71 with SMTP id ry7mr774245lbc.78.1461053929774; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:18:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l124sm10159217lfg.40.2016.04.19.01.18.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:18:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Kost To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:18:49 +0300 In-Reply-To: <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:41:14 +0200") Message-ID: <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-18 20:41 +0300) wrote: > It seems to me that this bug has no clear purpose, or too broad a > purpose, or something. > > Could you retitle it, or close it, or fix it, whichever is appropriate? > :-) Was it for me? I think the main purpose of this report was to tell us that "edit" name is confusing. So I would retitle it to "Rename 'guix edit' as it is confusing". But I don't know how; can it be done by sending some control message? --=20 Alex From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Apr 19 06:50:27 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Apr 2016 10:50:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39983 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asTEh-0008CP-74 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 06:50:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53148) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asTEg-0008C5-G2 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 06:50:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asTEY-0005qY-2s for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 06:50:21 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43521) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asTEX-0005qU-WB; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 06:50:18 -0400 Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]:49286 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1asTEX-000270-5q; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 06:50:17 -0400 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Alex Kost Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 1 =?utf-8?Q?Flor=C3=A9al?= an 224 de la =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x3D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:50:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:18:49 +0300") Message-ID: <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) Alex Kost skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-18 20:41 +0300) wrote: > >> It seems to me that this bug has no clear purpose, or too broad a >> purpose, or something. >> >> Could you retitle it, or close it, or fix it, whichever is appropriate? >> :-) > > Was it for me? =E2=80=98To whom it may concern=E2=80=99. :-) > I think the main purpose of this report was to tell us that "edit" > name is confusing. So I would retitle it to "Rename 'guix edit' as it > is confusing". But I don't know how; can it be done by sending some > control message? Yes, using the =E2=80=98retitle=E2=80=99 command, described somewhere at . However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO, even i= f it can occasionally stumble upon read-only files. Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Apr 20 03:21:04 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Apr 2016 07:21:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40953 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asmRc-0002nY-Gx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:21:04 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com ([209.85.215.66]:34450) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asmRa-0002ml-Uw for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:21:03 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f66.google.com with SMTP id e190so4772366lfe.1 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:21:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=30z+7b2iLwEto2rcCZmmugnA9Unvzo7PtBCdtPPcZL0=; b=kAYG5J8IXYWmbm9AZ5YzEDj3OtpnKp2RbMOtPzyo0QwbAOA7YAMa8TaWQO4kl07/oI DEGihmAF0UJANYsnBUcnPgP67jrnnHCQjcbmIpOmJjdJBLLCYDO0jl0f3HC2l2vU6hi1 Ha5LKHNFglz7xv92TbAO9cuCJ5z62SVR7nSVnt7kg71gSfE0ZRCbiedwvVEc1lL05ubH +S8Y1fa/t1QoBCeQiIPnoYys8RvTAq5rB8/oQEaSRbQhdnyFbS7ixGKtoftdn3LiH/KY MfuoyVx9TbyQ7QSev3gNmiPo7ydH7mr5QGRmrLogSrcqgXkUrbP5RhR6DJ9+Gqj3rzRq chkw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=30z+7b2iLwEto2rcCZmmugnA9Unvzo7PtBCdtPPcZL0=; b=HT6zaGnd/8yEDWIrAqWguTa05gBkUZgTaW4zEU/KV7bDwXB+p6YPK4WhxOI3T/T3T/ rK29pUkwXQpL0bZMti8qnIHoCT+SQt80hKpx0DIMvuoZpa8NTT8tp3i4k7OFxMcJ7Rt8 R8bZp2xy3n3Fx6Q8uleVdUuqms9RPNQct6P7MNrBPvfy/nl2hNiLIkWhstFlrUlM6s1S Rj0HCZmf9QhcDTyQdxCulkkyUdI/FChpR2NDE9Lzp2QOIr8Elak4HtfGfmPgs+QpejDR tgJMZQpnStBVn5SBQ32gxBQZ1FBBlPL7A5BokYIn7Uuo443rOSO7zU9krAAaE91NGjHj mYIA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUCeuT+Ju68tbEUGs/epkiOkK0ydGQkyKwTDzjHbRLteCG11HwQN940A+IEgOAjtA== X-Received: by 10.25.15.105 with SMTP id e102mr2973620lfi.103.1461136857172; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 31sm660222lft.36.2016.04.20.00.20.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:20:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Kost To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 10:20:58 +0300 In-Reply-To: <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:50:15 +0200") Message-ID: <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-19 13:50 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost skribis: > >> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-18 20:41 +0300) wrote: >> >>> It seems to me that this bug has no clear purpose, or too broad a >>> purpose, or something. >>> >>> Could you retitle it, or close it, or fix it, whichever is appropriate? >>> :-) >> >> Was it for me? > > =E2=80=98To whom it may concern=E2=80=99. :-) > >> I think the main purpose of this report was to tell us that "edit" >> name is confusing. So I would retitle it to "Rename 'guix edit' as it >> is confusing". But I don't know how; can it be done by sending some >> control message? > > Yes, using the =E2=80=98retitle=E2=80=99 command, described somewhere at > . Sorry, I don't see any mention of 'retitle' there, also I don't find retitle control message while using emacs-debbugs package. > However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the > solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO, even= if it can > occasionally stumble upon read-only files. OK, well I don't know what to do with it then. What about the following title: =C2=AB"guix edit" name may be confusing=C2=BB? --=20 Alex From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Apr 20 11:31:20 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Apr 2016 15:31:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41556 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asu64-0007Jr-Mg for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:31:20 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36610) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1asu63-0007Jc-KF for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:31:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asu5u-0002sl-M4 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:31:14 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46570) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1asu5u-0002sh-C8; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:31:10 -0400 Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]:58202 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1asu5t-00056E-RT; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:31:10 -0400 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Alex Kost Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 2 =?utf-8?Q?Flor=C3=A9al?= an 224 de la =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x3D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 17:31:07 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Wed, 20 Apr 2016 10:20:58 +0300") Message-ID: <87shygthz8.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) Alex Kost skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-19 13:50 +0300) wrote: > >> Alex Kost skribis: >> >>> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-18 20:41 +0300) wrote: >>> >>>> It seems to me that this bug has no clear purpose, or too broad a >>>> purpose, or something. >>>> >>>> Could you retitle it, or close it, or fix it, whichever is appropriate? >>>> :-) >>> >>> Was it for me? >> >> =E2=80=98To whom it may concern=E2=80=99. :-) >> >>> I think the main purpose of this report was to tell us that "edit" >>> name is confusing. So I would retitle it to "Rename 'guix edit' as it >>> is confusing". But I don't know how; can it be done by sending some >>> control message? >> >> Yes, using the =E2=80=98retitle=E2=80=99 command, described somewhere at >> . > > Sorry, I don't see any mention of 'retitle' there, also I don't find > retitle control message while using emacs-debbugs package. Sorry, it=E2=80=99s at . >> However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the >> solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO, eve= n if it can >> occasionally stumble upon read-only files. > > OK, well I don't know what to do with it then. What about the following > title: =C2=AB"guix edit" name may be confusing=C2=BB? Perfect! :-) Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Apr 21 06:18:25 2016 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Apr 2016 10:18:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42027 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1atBgn-0002gK-7V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 06:18:25 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-f170.google.com ([209.85.217.170]:32864) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1atBgl-0002g6-LC for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 06:18:24 -0400 Received: by mail-lb0-f170.google.com with SMTP id u8so24352508lbk.0 for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:18:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:subject:user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=Y6Usm82p1PdSSe1K1BBrgPqPjwI0HPKFLlijSan8PK0=; b=QEtWXZI54OxWfFOLkv9Jo6RYSjYK422TuH+3Ir8l/oWY6tsmGHZFwaiLuVR9G8jZTJ uEPT4LAPUd6Zac30c11VGmNqbdUupEmGM26ERhICGXXUNnyGCL9nE2RpzGmM8uTvXWcM EMGktIJHZefLrlEhh66KEHHv8xld4rPqd0q0YH/bTnSh1cTmx0mNFDCYkPKuRdG6tMsm AXmTMVQHcUzZDevFqUtPK3nqs9m4fLvv8Cj9FZ2YDSl8ObqlCiam/yk5QE6p18/puf5r gxrTLF3/oVsLzfAbDT1XmQV7sCaI+xufGdnF87YdXn3Vuyi7s2hW8lflA7mtm4gqUQ+U Atyg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:user-agent:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=Y6Usm82p1PdSSe1K1BBrgPqPjwI0HPKFLlijSan8PK0=; b=ak3JzicYt97DqaXoijpXO70tTysGvZDhic3HyVBvQwlTOfwNVlPX7bsIpdaebCRdtE 0L2A4xl5n+dRf/CnuG+bkLnEzOheg00Bjyzlqx1G/0MQxB4oR14FF3LqYY+WbU94d4Uz TORqYo0lCP8EG8n5W8yPQcqG7V+cH1/7twAtad29aY/sL84QHYVMGW4z818IN/jz28Pb sLgiKMM0g7iE8TkxlVEurxGD0fQEHgWaVN3RQuMtrVz7quzEWOrLgjYzkPYW0YlHcAbV jPe9M8bTmzwvrZKW1g+SL5lGhMvbpsNy3eS4mwoElvHTwroEsYEpMSj94RezBi9/xcK/ Rarw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUJhhCXgD9xWncFzr+RNOYSbPx6n6YGTMYJclIzYwLBp0VaZDqP6gbbySHsj3jRDw== X-Received: by 10.112.167.197 with SMTP id zq5mr6138062lbb.75.1461233897789; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:18:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 74sm430375lfz.14.2016.04.21.03.18.16 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:18:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Kost To: control@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: "guix edit" name may be confusing User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:18:19 +0300 Message-ID: <87inzb9ses.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) retitle 22587 "guix edit" name may be confusing From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Apr 21 06:40:10 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Apr 2016 10:40:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42033 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1atC1p-0004rM-PL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 06:40:09 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:36581) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1atC1o-0004r9-1D for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 06:40:08 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f46.google.com with SMTP id g184so57921839lfb.3 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:40:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=S7p34ap5vs9H4Vn5fZuCsYuVx6oglsJDS6p28pxolFI=; b=dBcwtw3+Eqb40uZa4PH88AhQucXD/RXZ3Re+/4CnEUjmu2BDEp4kdVBTyLss+wVkvJ GdP20+K03g2bWz2fE6kYl7QTpIz8cduMZEzbRo+JWGoxNrCbEMdWpnBZmR53DMDYCRr9 rRXGVpEXGbKcfzokENb8Lp520d/FN9WZVX0+VzXW1u17+167FU2hitZTdSsB8syFSG+0 gvpGNQtwbG95rGW1eGMSmvqCgyFomFm2umOYlgNJhGK2Llbd2kKmOj1buWPxn4CmZ+NL XawIvejyEOztRRmOFlx3c7l6f8RJShopeBCWA4spNqR4I1XxTFdwlbwhkF/MWOVMbv+/ DVkw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=S7p34ap5vs9H4Vn5fZuCsYuVx6oglsJDS6p28pxolFI=; b=ARbxvsSBSysiDBYkxv9TzCtlNFTOYaeAEcU6ysUgXKFmkVqQawwh4kxPIqh87pPpIh iC3fjs07C97MjrXkYAWN50TACttj9zgl0yWpkFigl0OstkUtwZyJhrHFtkuPYEIoczeo uGTxfuaXqC0mkDgFQ76K7Tf4la93JC9Nrg+eMYM9qa1qbvWWM954zOq/ABY0quYGI5UD vw41kWUTvgVf2YYuzQxtuNJ0aSxwk39pbvV9ji7/S88ckwF5+c6Q7+eFte1HNUhpLSA4 GiiGMqdvX/xVQDhXyH5ZdtZ9iKh4weLA1I8+TeBd33NQNGYgcibuk8tPwR0sN0kCCfAz YCSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXtPL3Rs6kAsD0OhLH9bN0i+7tqH+fODbhUJI4ztYdUWZwrj7idOv4zIW5t+i1KxA== X-Received: by 10.25.167.19 with SMTP id q19mr6156152lfe.24.1461235202216; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bd5sm427054lbc.12.2016.04.21.03.40.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:40:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Kost To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> <87shygthz8.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:40:03 +0300 In-Reply-To: <87shygthz8.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Wed, 20 Apr 2016 17:31:07 +0200") Message-ID: <87eg9z9rek.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-20 18:31 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost skribis: > >> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-19 13:50 +0300) wrote: >> >>> Yes, using the =E2=80=98retitle=E2=80=99 command, described somewhere at >>> . >> >> Sorry, I don't see any mention of 'retitle' there, also I don't find >> retitle control message while using emacs-debbugs package. > > Sorry, it=E2=80=99s at . Thanks! And sorry for bothering, I should have found it myself. I didn't realize that debbugs is such a featureful bug-tracker. >>> However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the >>> solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO, ev= en if it can >>> occasionally stumble upon read-only files. >> >> OK, well I don't know what to do with it then. What about the following >> title: =C2=AB"guix edit" name may be confusing=C2=BB? > > Perfect! :-) Done. --=20 Alex From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Jun 02 15:40:55 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Jun 2016 19:40:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52061 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b8YUB-0000rH-AS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:55 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58252) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b8YUA-0000r5-BO for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b8YU2-0005Vn-70 for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:49 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39955) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b8YU2-0005Vj-3S; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:46 -0400 Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]:47808 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1b8YU1-0006o0-DQ; Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:40:45 -0400 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Alex Kost Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> <87shygthz8.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg9z9rek.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 21:40:43 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87eg9z9rek.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:40:03 +0300") Message-ID: <87porz2xc4.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) Hi! Alex Kost skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-20 18:31 +0300) wrote: [...] >>>> However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the >>>> solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO, e= ven if it can >>>> occasionally stumble upon read-only files. >>> >>> OK, well I don't know what to do with it then. What about the following >>> title: =C2=AB"guix edit" name may be confusing=C2=BB? >> >> Perfect! :-) > > Done. I=E2=80=99m rather inclined to close this bug as =E2=80=98wontfix=E2=80=99.= Thoughts? Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jun 03 15:04:18 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Jun 2016 19:04:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53482 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b8uOH-0006xr-Sx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:04:18 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-f50.google.com ([209.85.215.50]:34673) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b8uOG-0006xe-FM for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:04:16 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f50.google.com with SMTP id k98so60394032lfi.1 for <22587@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 12:04:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Bso0gFahSeW9V3yOQbjx5SEeIOOxxjIyiIM3CNpTqvM=; b=pjVymqxWl2LptQvgF+0EI0FDYQtJYBYp9y9JLYdFYAwkceouAUzVj+0uYVg6T4k4/C T4D+8cbxnTY+JWH3e3RHaubIVWc+1LiW2Lo74+JRiz0iAO/r/9JdJSE9GAtDkjkOY99T BjOFB7lSGeWASvlbXt6HFPcXDV9cEctmyixKNz86HDkH+WGdZxbausoXjPcOPS3+Hgi3 OTN6yGWipoG20F3iloUB6+VMk4z2hzE5Py0+lbfzyAk0iK8YECKtGg00y0eQ+qi7u2Gm fUTjL9v6vY1MocDdPFdT5ImTGCm64nR2q3v0+Rqk5jvt78dYIIbjXmjXery4EAzwQLgj YyOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Bso0gFahSeW9V3yOQbjx5SEeIOOxxjIyiIM3CNpTqvM=; b=h4n2oQ+LRBaEMCmDVldHpox6CXRpS9iItCa1ansAloq0kXVtuGk9VHaMLTl/TOq3BD ve5MFMJ6kCnyxxIA+ghtkvjSGVtnc/9QvNItyhJdL/Rlabai9+A+eUs/jEz0DinbmyRq PBDduu5Sd7fawxpT+nSSMfMpghl5LRZSQ7vP07nMnUmI2D5iII3NdmGAtrVkCA7o4Zse LEUuoEDyP0pTDF+JQsI5OIo60sefXx64nKnu4oW2EQIv/IdyCn6DOSuiZmSidTqYxEfK HZ1JpseLf0zgHTOvl4zR3tqi7cxXLk1qOioC18UgypEvWEGBMTOjv5K81ThLy3S3OTpY Hytw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tI1AI+6DGa/mvSOO/KCe8NJJlRxhB+sSnpL7OoA8ixncZ6ElA4eLKS/LLLByySpCQ== X-Received: by 10.25.214.135 with SMTP id p7mr1529342lfi.92.1464980650570; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 12:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from leviafan ([217.107.192.156]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id le4sm641230lbc.10.2016.06.03.12.04.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Jun 2016 12:04:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Kost To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> <87shygthz8.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg9z9rek.fsf@gmail.com> <87porz2xc4.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 22:04:08 +0300 In-Reply-To: <87porz2xc4.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Thu, 02 Jun 2016 21:40:43 +0200") Message-ID: <87r3ce9jrr.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-06-02 22:40 +0300) wrote: > Alex Kost skribis: > >> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-20 18:31 +0300) wrote: > > [...] > >>>>> However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the >>>>> solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO, = even if it can >>>>> occasionally stumble upon read-only files. >>>> >>>> OK, well I don't know what to do with it then. What about the followi= ng >>>> title: =C2=AB"guix edit" name may be confusing=C2=BB? >>> >>> Perfect! :-) >> >> Done. > > I=E2=80=99m rather inclined to close this bug as =E2=80=98wontfix=E2=80= =99. Thoughts? I would prefer it to be solved by renaming "guix edit" to "guix package definition", but I think it will not be welcomed by most users and authors, so 'wontfix' is fine by me. --=20 Alex From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jun 04 07:22:01 2016 Received: (at 22587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2016 11:22:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53785 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eT-0000EH-8i for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52099) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eS-0000E5-ND for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eI-0006hu-Oa for 22587@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:21:55 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:37400) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eI-0006hk-LO; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:21:50 -0400 Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]:46136 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eG-0001wa-D5; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:21:48 -0400 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Alex Kost Subject: Re: bug#22587: =?utf-8?B?4oCYZ3VpeCBlZGl04oCZ?= & =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98M-x?= guix-edit' typo, rename, & mode change References: <8737t4jt1j.fsf@gmail.com> <87oabrr460.fsf@gmail.com> <87twlj6op5.fsf@gmail.com> <878u0bia77.fsf@gmail.com> <87h9ey95mt.fsf@gnu.org> <87y48ahuza.fsf@gmail.com> <8760vd7tzs.fsf@gnu.org> <87ega07nl1.fsf@gmail.com> <87shygthz8.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg9z9rek.fsf@gmail.com> <87porz2xc4.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3ce9jrr.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 17 Prairial an 224 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 13:21:46 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87r3ce9jrr.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Fri, 03 Jun 2016 22:04:08 +0300") Message-ID: <87shwt19o5.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22587 Cc: 22587@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) Alex Kost skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-06-02 22:40 +0300) wrote: > >> Alex Kost skribis: >> >>> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (2016-04-20 18:31 +0300) wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>>>> However, I think (1) the title should describe the bug, not the >>>>>> solution, and (2) =E2=80=98guix edit=E2=80=99 does what it says IMO,= even if it can >>>>>> occasionally stumble upon read-only files. >>>>> >>>>> OK, well I don't know what to do with it then. What about the follow= ing >>>>> title: =C2=AB"guix edit" name may be confusing=C2=BB? >>>> >>>> Perfect! :-) >>> >>> Done. >> >> I=E2=80=99m rather inclined to close this bug as =E2=80=98wontfix=E2=80= =99. Thoughts? > > I would prefer it to be solved by renaming "guix edit" to "guix package > definition", but I think it will not be welcomed by most users and > authors, so 'wontfix' is fine by me. I=E2=80=99m of course unsure what =E2=80=9Cmost=E2=80=9D users would think,= but I find =E2=80=98guix package definition=E2=80=99 too wordy and probably too hard to find for a newcomer. OK, marking it as wontfix, and we can always revisit the issue later if people disagree! Ludo=E2=80=99. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jun 04 07:22:15 2016 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2016 11:22:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53789 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eh-0000FA-I0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:15 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52116) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eg-0000Ez-Pk for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eb-0006iq-1B for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:09 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:37402) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b99ea-0006il-U2 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:08 -0400 Received: from reverse-83.fdn.fr ([80.67.176.83]:46142 helo=pluto) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1b99eZ-0001xb-4q for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jun 2016 07:22:07 -0400 Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2016 13:22:05 +0200 Message-Id: <87r3cd19nm.fsf@gnu.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: control message for bug #22587 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) tags 22587 wontfix close 22587 From unknown Wed Jun 25 03:53:38 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2016 11:24:04 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator