Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> writes: > 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.
The name change seems like a wise idea. It would be somewhat frustrating for `guix' command to behave differently based on whether this hypothetical guile-guix-records is installed in my home profile. I might simply not understand the module system well enough, so if Guix gets "its" version, and applications using the dedicated package get that version, all is fine. But I *think* it does not work like that and the module name space is effectively global (first on search path wins?). Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.
