L p R n d n <g...@lprndn.info> writes:
> Guix is ... > > ... a package and system manager. (A seen previously, system manager is > too wide) > ... a package manager and machine administrator. > ... a package and machine administrator. > ... a package and environment manager. > > WDYT? If anyone has an idea, don't be shy :) “administrator” is generally understood to be a person (as in “system administrator”). “environment manager” is just as vague as “system manager”, in my opinion — “everything is the environment!”. It only makes sense to people who are already familiar with the term “environment” in a computing context. That’s the advantage the word “package manager” has — it’s already a well-established term, for better or worse. > I'd like to keep the "package manager" part as it'll probably ring a > bell to any linux user and helps understand the not so familiar part > (system/environment dealing). Right, that’s what I meant. We are underselling Guix, though, if we keep referring to it as a “package manager”, because people’s familiarity with other package managers may make them think in smaller terms. FWIW, I’m with Ludo here with regards to “Guix” as the “single brand”. I disagree with this part that George wrote: > "Guix System" is a "bad" name for "GuixSD." Why? Because a new user's > first expectation is for "Guix system" to refer to the whole of Guix, > which we want to call "Guix" (referred to as "Guix Brand" below). In my experience “… system” is not generally used to describe a tool’s full set of features. I think “Guix System” is just the right term for everything that Guix generates or operates on with the “guix system” set of commands. “GuixOS” is, in my opinion, a pretty terrible name (I’m also not a fan of all the other “…OS” names out there) and it needlessly keeps the confusion between “Guix, the tool” and “Guix, the system” alive. -- Ricardo