Re: Inconsistencies in 'guix system' and 'guix package'

[Alex Kost]

Ludovic Courtès (2015-10-27 19:06 +0300) wrote:

> Alex Kost  skribis:
>
>> 1. Should 'guix system' actions share the same options?
>>
>> I think it is confusing that recently added 'guix system' actions
>> (dmd-graph, extension-graph and list-generations) can take the same
>> command-line options as the other system actions (--dry-run, --no-grub,
>> etc.), because specifying these options doesn't take any effect.
>>
>> Another thing: "guix system  --help" displays the same help
>> message for any action.  With 'list-generations' it is even more
>> confusing, as (unlike the other actions) it takes PATTERN, not FILE as
>> the positional argument.
>>
>> What about splitting 'guix system' into submodules (as it is done for
>> 'guix import') with putting general bits into (guix scripts system)?
>
> I like the idea of submodules à la ‘guix import’!  Would you like to
> give it a try?  The thing is, all the actions except ‘list-generations’
> have a lot in common.

Yes, I would like to give a try, though I will not give a time to it
very soon :-(  But sooner or later… I hope :-)

[...]
>> Analogously, would it be appropriate to replace some 'guix package'
>> options (--show, --list-generations --list-installed, --list-available)
>> with subcommands ('guix package show', ...)?
>
> But then some operations would have no subcommands: install, remove,
> rollback, etc.  So the syntax would be:
>
>   guix package SUBCOMMAND OPTIONS
>
> or:
>
>   guix package OPTIONS
>
> depending on the situation.  That’s not great either.

Heh, not great, I agree.

> Maybe (thinking out loud) we could separate this in:
>
>   guix package -> for installation, removal, upgrade, rollback
>   guix query   -> for list-whatever, show
>
> and then we need to find a place for --delete-generations.
>
> Thoughts?

'guix query' sounds interesting!

> Seems like a can of worms, definitely post-0.9.0.

Indeed; I just feel there are things to improve there, so I raised this
question.  But I should probably say "Sorry for bothering", as I don't
really have my understanding how an ideal 'guix package' should look.

Thanks for answering!  (and sorry for bothering)

-- 
Alex

Re: Inconsistencies in 'guix system' and 'guix package'

[Ludovic Courtès]

Alex Kost  skribis:

> 1. Should 'guix system' actions share the same options?
>
> I think it is confusing that recently added 'guix system' actions
> (dmd-graph, extension-graph and list-generations) can take the same
> command-line options as the other system actions (--dry-run, --no-grub,
> etc.), because specifying these options doesn't take any effect.
>
> Another thing: "guix system  --help" displays the same help
> message for any action.  With 'list-generations' it is even more
> confusing, as (unlike the other actions) it takes PATTERN, not FILE as
> the positional argument.
>
> What about splitting 'guix system' into submodules (as it is done for
> 'guix import') with putting general bits into (guix scripts system)?

I like the idea of submodules à la ‘guix import’!  Would you like to
give it a try?  The thing is, all the actions except ‘list-generations’
have a lot in common.

I am indeed unsatisfied with the current situation, but did not have a
better idea.

> 2. What about adding subcommands for 'guix package'?
>
> As we have 'guix system list-generations', would it be more consistent
> to have 'guix package list-generations' instead of the current 'guix
> package --list-generations'?

Or the other way around?  :-)

> More generally, I think there is a similar issue with 'guix package', as
> with 'guix system': using some options together doesn't make sense
> (e.g., using --keep-failed, --show and --dry-run).  For example, the
> following command:
>
>   guix package --show=magit --list-generations=1
>
> displays generation 1, while the following:
>
>   guix package --list-generations=1 --show=magit
>
> describes 'magit' package.
>
> Analogously, would it be appropriate to replace some 'guix package'
> options (--show, --list-generations --list-installed, --list-available)
> with subcommands ('guix package show', ...)?

But then some operations would have no subcommands: install, remove,
rollback, etc.  So the syntax would be:

  guix package SUBCOMMAND OPTIONS

or:

  guix package OPTIONS

depending on the situation.  That’s not great either.

Maybe (thinking out loud) we could separate this in:

  guix package -> for installation, removal, upgrade, rollback
  guix query   -> for list-whatever, show

and then we need to find a place for --delete-generations.

Thoughts?

Seems like a can of worms, definitely post-0.9.0.

Ludo’.