From patchwork Mon Mar 11 17:05:12 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: =?utf-8?q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= X-Patchwork-Id: 61669 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork@mira.cbaines.net Delivered-To: patchwork@mira.cbaines.net Received: by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix, from userid 113) id CCE2027BBE9; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:07:01 +0000 (GMT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on mira.cbaines.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A238B27BBE2 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:06:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj6i-0001d5-CF; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:06:36 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj6a-0001cc-5C for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:06:33 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj6Z-00084Z-RZ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:06:27 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj77-0007PI-PF for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:07:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#69587] [PATCH] doc: Add =?utf-8?b?4oCcU291cmNl?= Tree =?utf-8?b?U3RydWN0dXJl4oCd?= section. Resent-From: Ludovic =?utf-8?q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:07:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69587 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" Cc: 69587@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 69587-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B69587.171017677828416 (code B ref 69587); Mon, 11 Mar 2024 17:07:01 +0000 Received: (at 69587) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Mar 2024 17:06:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41164 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj6Q-0007OE-8c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:06:18 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41758) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj6N-0007Nk-B4 for 69587@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:06:17 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rjj5h-0007rJ-Op; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 13:05:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=gtk2KRS5zYyZiu5N2QWK7JIc+eztXHbFKx40OaRr+Ck=; b=Ojkd5485LtmW+Hbkg0OM AMCLWEEihmw8EUrAko/y1/QSo3EaSbOSOwoNHS+3o9Qm0e7XD0wCyaIhqMFWeRNJhKcFFoUs3+pij uryKQ08lmZFasNo808u8GHCYZQjxzu+vaJfhOd+pnr4cowfKJNjjmC9AX+iUyYgbJE1fr+tRawcaN EablnXgVoNxOUGSR51wp5vS//oY6BZgZiRPM5eXTG604aB94pybEyloXXqGwDls4Q8IQF5S6dV098 e5Gvz1yf9WL6RuKbFkS/w5rAmaXQVhprdQ0hSOSg/Ykx8+wBYnp5UEwMfnWu1RH44weS41bzsZEvx ZEQIr9ojiLMDig==; From: Ludovic =?utf-8?q?Court=C3=A8s?= In-Reply-To: <878r2r8o7f.fsf@pelzflorian.de> (pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de's message of "Sat, 09 Mar 2024 15:38:44 +0100") References: <878r2sa9hd.fsf@pelzflorian.de> <877cic2xa6.fsf@gnu.org> <878r2r8o7f.fsf@pelzflorian.de> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:05:12 +0100 Message-ID: <87le6oog1j.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+patchwork=mira.cbaines.net@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+patchwork=mira.cbaines.net@gnu.org X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: Patches Hello! "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" skribis: > Josselin’s talk is different in that it is a talk of more than 30 > minutes. In so much time, it can give more detailed guidance to almost > the whole guix source tree, even including build-aux and nix. Josselin > also gives hints to use git grep (like you) but also to read the > commentary at the top of the file. This may be a helpful hint to > someone starting out, but someone starting out maybe does not want to > read as much as a complete talk. If they wanted it all, then better > link to Josselin’s talk. Right. > Ludovic Courtès writes: >> The order I chose is (roughly) from lower-level to higher-level: >> >> (guix store) -> (guix derivation) -> (guix packages) -> … >> … -> (gnu packages) -> (gnu system) -> … >> >> Does that make sense? > > In your section the modules directly in (guix …) appeared unsorted to > me. Could you explicitly state this order in the manual section? Good idea, will do. > Nice things like (guix swh) or (gnu system), (gnu build), (gnu > installer), (gnu machine), or po, still seem not useful for the general > populace to me. This is in the “Contributing” chapter, so we’re talking about a subset of the general populace. :-) You might argue that few current contributors care about the modules you mention, but by exposing the structure of the code, my hope is that more people would dare take a look and fiddle with it. [...] >> The examples were meant to illustrate what is meant by “core”. Do you >> think some other adjective or a longer description would help? >> >>> Perhaps (guix …) should be listed after (gnu …) and defined as the >>> Guix mechanisms that do not belong in gnu? Not quite sure either. > > Josselin called the distinction between (guix …) and (gnu …) murky, > explaining that most of (guix …) must not import (gnu …) except by > module-ref, while (guix scripts …) and such can just use-modules (gnu > …). To me, gnu/packages.scm looks like core as well, but it rightfully > is in gnu. I think “murky” is a strong word, or at least it shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning that the guix/gnu distinction is arbitrary. I’ll try to clarify that as well. I was going to send a v2 but I’m not sure the changes I made fully address your concerns: Let me know what you think! Thanks, Ludo’. diff --git a/doc/contributing.texi b/doc/contributing.texi index ff7065ad2a..18f3705a43 100644 --- a/doc/contributing.texi +++ b/doc/contributing.texi @@ -563,7 +563,9 @@ Source Tree Structure @table @file @item guix -This is the location of core Guix mechanisms. A few examples: +This is the location of core Guix mechanisms. To illustrate what is +meant by ``core'', here are a few examples, starting from low-level +tools and going towards higher-level tools: @table @code @item (guix store) @@ -638,10 +640,16 @@ Source Tree Structure @end table The directories we have seen so far all live under @file{guix/}. The -other important place is the @code{gnu/} directory, which contains +other important place is the @file{gnu/} directory, which contains primarily package definitions as well as libraries and tools for Guix System (@pxref{System Configuration}) and Guix Home (@pxref{Home -Configuration}). +Configuration}), all of which build upon functionality provided by +@code{(guix @dots{})} modules@footnote{For this reason, @code{(guix +@dots{})} modules must generally not depend on @code{(gnu @dots{})} +modules, with one notable exception: @code{(guix build-system @dots{})} +modules may look up packages at run time---e.g., @code{(guix +build-system cmake)} needs to access the @code{cmake} variable at run +time.}. @table @file @cindex package modules