Hello! Giacomo Leidi <[email protected]> skribis:
> It looks ok, it would be cleaner to have a single source to maintain but if > the carry over can be automatized (I believe it could), it shouldn't > be a lot of effort. Why changing the module name though? Maybe to avoid confusion and/or incompatibilities? Support (guix records) evolves in incompatible ways that are okay for Guix and not okay for other uses. Maybe it’s a fine detail though. Maybe let’s just start with (guix records) imported as-is and we’ll see. > I suppose if the README states that the library is simply an export of > sorts from Guix mainline it wouldn't happen a lot that users would > find themselves to depend both on Guix and the extracted library (?). Yeah. > It seems more complicated than I thought, but I am still motivated to do it. > If there are no objections I would like to migrate the repository I > created under guix organization. Of course if anyone reading this email has > any feedback on changes I should do (like a new module name) > before the migration, let me know either here or via a Codeberg issue. I am > still puzzled by how access control works for repos other than > guix/guix. Can anyone from the Codeberg team help me with this? I think that as owner of the repo, you have to ask for a migration to the Guix org, and then an “owner” of the Guix org must accept the migration. That’s it. What do you want to call it? I’m fine with the migration, what about others in the “owners” team? Thanks, Ludo’.
