Subject: Re: [bug#58583] [PATCH 0/1] scripts: package: Forbid installation of the guix package.

From: zimoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2022 19:32:41 +0100

Hi Maxim,

On jeu., 03 nov. 2022 at 11:03, Maxim Cournoyer <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Referring to info '(guix) Package Naming', that doesn't seem to be a
> written rule; my rule of thumb here would be: if something exists to be
> used exclusively as a command, drop the language-specific prefix.  If it
> is a library or both a library and a command, keep the prefix.  In
> doubt, keep the prefix.

Yes, for sure.  And I agree that we should follow as close as possible
this rule of thumb because it provides a good consistency.

My point is: the line is not always clear and for some packages we have
a grey area.

Another example, we have pandoc and ghc-pandoc.  IIRC, these two
packages had been created for a similar reason as we are discussing
here; from my understanding.

All in all, I am convinced that raising an error when installing the
package named ’guix’ is not an appropriated patch for fixing the
confusion generated by the package named ’guix’.

Well, I have said my opinion and this patch is not a breaking change
revolutionizing the world neither. ;-) Feel free to push a patch
containing what you find appropriate.

Cheers,
simon