Hi,
> 2018-01-17 · website: say what Guix is at the very top > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2018-01/msg00232.html Hey, that’s me! Naturally, I do agree that we need clearer product differentiation and your drafts are pretty and clear as always. On the other hand I’ve always felt that the term “package manager” is so limiting. It primes people to expect a package manager, but none of the features in the “guix system” family of commands match that. Likewise, all that container stuff we do with “guix shell -C” lies just outside of what one would think of when hearing “package manager”. In my presentations I try to drive home the point that Guix is a solution for reproducible deployment at every level of scale. I have a set of slides similar to the “Reproducible Outputs” section in your home-page.pdf, going from package to environments to containers to systems to sites (via “guix deploy”). I wonder if we should find a way to phase out the use of the term “package manager”, which seems to fire the wrong synapses and awaken associations with things that aren’t at all like Guix. (Imagine we came from the build system side and positioned Guix as “A Better GNU Make”. That would be similarly flawed and evoke images that fail to match what Guix actually is.) -- Ricardo
