From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 07 04:34:37 2021 Received: (at 50960) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Oct 2021 08:34:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45967 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mYOrN-0006if-EY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2021 04:34:37 -0400 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:32868) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mYOrL-0006iO-Gu for 50960@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Oct 2021 04:34:36 -0400 IronPort-HdrOrdr: =?us-ascii?q?A9a23=3ALr58J6x7Tng+9gDbkc2GKrPwob1zdoMgy1kn?= =?us-ascii?q?xilNYDRPeM2ZiMyi2NwHvCWEwQr4WBkb9uxoS5PwJU80lKQFhLX5Uo3DYODZgh?= =?us-ascii?q?rUEGgP1+XfK9OJIVyJygZyvZ0QAJSWIueAfWSTFa3BkX6F++9J+qjyzEhD7d2u?= =?us-ascii?q?vUuFNDsaHp2IjD0JaDpzcHcWeOAcP+tEZeWhD6N8zlLKExkqh6KAdwE4tsf41q?= =?us-ascii?q?P2ffndEGc77nAchDVmwQnYi4ITRHOjr3Ejuw0k+8ZYzYGTqX2f2k2p2cvLsCP0?= =?us-ascii?q?5ivV6dBfg9HhysRObfb8+/QoFg=3D=3D?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,326,1620684000"; d="scan'208";a="532557243" Received: from 91-160-117-201.subs.proxad.net (HELO ribbon) ([91.160.117.201]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Oct 2021 10:34:25 +0200 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Konrad Hinsen Subject: Re: bug#50960: [PATCH 00/10] Add 'guix shell' to subsume 'guix environment' References: <20211002102116.27726-1-ludo@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 10:34:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Konrad Hinsen's message of "Wed, 06 Oct 2021 10:12:10 +0200") Message-ID: <87mtnlfd2n.fsf_-_@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 50960 Cc: 50960@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi Konrad, Konrad Hinsen skribis: > Looking at the proposal and then the discussion, I wonder if the main > issue with "guix shell" is that it's two very different things wrapped > into one: > > 1) A convenience utility for interactive work, in particular software > development, implemented as "guix shell" with no arguments. > > 2) A modernized "guix environment" for both interactive and scripting > use. To me it=E2=80=99s the same as =E2=80=98guix environment=E2=80=99, but with= a slightly different command-line interface; =E2=80=98guix environment=E2=80=99 was already serv= es these two use cases. > The behavior of "guix shell" with and without arguments is sufficiently > different, which will make it a challenge to document, and then a > challenge for users to understand. And part of the criticism related to > the tacit execution of files is about the convenience for 1) vs. the > risk in 2). =E2=80=98guix shell=E2=80=99 without arguments is equivalent to =E2=80=98gu= ix environment -f guix.scm=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=98guix environment -m manifest.scm=E2=80=99. > So... how about making this two different commands? They could of course > share most of the implementation. > > I'd use "guix shell" for the scenario that actually starts a shell, and > something different, perhaps "guix process", for the infrastructure > command for use in scripts. I don=E2=80=99t think there=E2=80=99s enough to warrant two different comma= nds (and perhaps we could leave out the auto-detection of =E2=80=98guix.scm=E2=80=99= or =E2=80=98manifest.scm=E2=80=99 is that proves to be too controversial). Maybe you=E2=80=99re hinting at the name and the fact that it suggests it= =E2=80=99s starting a shell. I=E2=80=99m not fond of it, notably for that reason. Fo= r the record, it came out as the only proposal that seemed viable to me: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/38529#17 Thoughts? Thanks for your feedback, Ludo=E2=80=99.