2016-08-10 14:52 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net>: > > Catonano <caton...@gmail.com> writes: > > > 2016-08-10 13:46 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net>: > > > >> > >> Philippe Ombredanne <pombreda...@nexb.com> writes: > >> > >> > David Craven <da...@craven.ch> wrote: > >> >> I aborted, since I realised that guix package -s doesn't include the > >> >> source url and hash, which would be important for a testsuite... > >> > > >> > IMHO, if the rec data is the only way to get to the packages data, the > >> > source url would be rather essential to get in. > >> > >> The recutils output is not the *only* way to access the package data. > >> All packages in Guix are just Scheme variables. Package data are > >> available as S-expressions and can be read by Scheme programs or parsed > >> by external applications. The recutils output is just an additional > >> format used when interacting with Guix on the command line. > >> > >> (Personally, I’m not enthusiastic about adding a serialised form of the > >> source field to the recutils output.) > >> > >> ~~ Ricardo > >> > >> > >> > > Not so long ago, someone posted a script that produced a web page with > the > > results of linting all the packages > > > > That's an example > > > > One could produce an xml file to be imported in Gephi, just to make > another > > example. > > > > Or a SQL text file to be imported in some relational db, or a different > > format to be imported in some not relational db... > > I understand that it may be useful. I just think that the > representation as a Guile Scheme expression/value is *already* much more > useful. That’s what made “guix web” possible, a web interface like this > one: > > http://guix.mdc-berlin.de
Yes, Ricardo, I was not disagreeing with you. I was just trying to offer Philippe some more perspective. In fact I believe that the approach you envisioned (a cycle through the packages values, leaving only the decompress phase and adding a phase that calls Philippe's tool) has its merits. Only, if I was Philippe, I would regret storing the output in the store I'd prefer to be able to store the output in the regular file system In this regard, I think that the threads about pipelines (for reproducible science), some time ago, were quite interesting
