Re: [NonGNU ELPA] New package: project-store

Stéphane Marks <[email protected]> writes:

> How about the namespace "project-nix" and elide "store" entirely to
> keep it short?

Thanks for the suggestion.

I think project-nix is clearly worse a name than project-store:

- project-nix is more generic and has no clear definition: what is a
  project nix or what is a nix project?  Is it a project containing some
  .nix files?  For example, does adding a few .nix files to Emacs make
  Emacs a nix project?  Is it a project mostly consisting of .nix files?
- Store and project are the keys of this package.  Besides "store" and
  "project", it is reasonable to add "nix" or "nix and guix" to the
  name.  But it is absurd to remove "store" from the name, same as
  removing "project" from the name.

(BTW, I am curious why you suggest project-nix which your previous
arguments apply to perfectly.  Am I missing something?)

> That Nix/Guix are colloquially called
> "stores" by some is not the detail that matters for this package, IMO.

No, it is not that Nix/Guix are colloquially called "stores" by some.
Store is a key concept in them, a key concept that has top-level
sections in both their reference manuals, a key concept that the 3rd
sentence of "NixOS homepage -> Get started -> How Nix works" is
"Nix stores packages in the *Nix store*."

You seem to have some interesting opinion or understanding on this
topic.

> The first link I get when I Google nix store is
> https://search.nixos.org/packages which doesn't even mention the word
> store anywhere.

Yes, this link is irrelevant.  I have shared my different Google results
of "nix store" before and also a few useful links.

(I am still wondering what you are implying via your web search results.
Are you saying store is not a key concept of Nix?  Otherwise, I do not
see how you web search results are relevant here.)

> I'm aware that Nix supports
> several kinds of "stores" and using the word store in the package might suggest support for them all; e.g., the http binary
> cache, the s3 binary cache, etc.  Even "project-nix-local" would be more precise if you intend to support only that store.

Actually, suggesting support for them is completely a bad thing.  It can
invites potential contributor to add support for them.  This is a big
advantage of "project-store": it gives room to future extension and
invites contribution.

> As ELPA is considered a part of Emacs, I think it is a collectively good thing that package names are well chosen

Agree.

It just that different people have different concerns and
understandings, so their well chosen names may be different.

To be clear, I do not choose the current name randomly.  I love to make
informed choose as I mentioned before.

> avoid potential conflicts in the future.

What potential future conflicts are you having in mind?