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

On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 2:36 PM Lin Jian <[email protected]> wrote:

> Stéphane Marks <[email protected]> writes:
>
> >  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?)
> >
> > Because it's about project.el and sharing that namespace makes sense as
> your prefix suggests.  The notion of a "store" is
> > not universal despite your rhetoric suggesting it is.
>
> Do not put words in my mouth, please.  I never said store is universal.
> I kept saying store is a key concept in Nix.
>
> My words are honest and I try to base them on facts whenever possible.
> I feel attacked by the word "rhetoric".  How does moderation work on
> this mailing list?  I will not reply to Stéphane until he apologizes or
> some moderation happens.
>
> > So it's not a universal term for the concept, it's a Nix term.
>
> Totally agree with that.  I never said it is not.
>
> > You seem to be suggesting that everyone else in the Emacs world will
> share your Nix experience and background and
> > somehow know what a store is.
>
> No, I do not suggest that.  But I do expect *you* to know what a store
> is in the context of Nix/Guix, because I have provided some useful links
> to you.
>
> > Only in your mind since you like "stores" whatever those are and which
> are not a generic thing they are Nix/Guix specific
> > as a naming convention for their implementation approach.  They were not
> the first by decades of my own experience
> > having built, as I said, "stores" for giant distributed computing
> environments without using the word store or using
> > Haskell or Nix or Guile or Guix.
>
> OK, I think I get your reasoning now.  I think you want to avoid using
> "store" to refer to something more generic than Nix/Guix/... store,
> including something you have worked on.  I think that is a totally
> reasonable concern.
>
> However, I fail to see how using project-store as name for a package
> that does not intend to deal with something more generic than
> Nix/Guix/... store conflicts with your concern.
>
> > Hence project-nix or if you really must insist, project-nix-store
> despite that terminology saying zero about what it is to
> > anyone except an educated Nix user.
>
> Just to be clear, your "despite that terminology ..." applies to only
> project-nix-store, not project-nix, right?  And by that terminology, you
> mean "store", right?  In other words, you prefer "project-nix" over
> "project-nix-store", right?
>
> If so, I have to say I do not get why you are trying so hard to avoid
> the word "store", so hard that you prefer clearly worse "project-nix"
> over "project-nix-store".
>
> > Namespace conflicts in the project- prefix.  Perhaps someone would want
> to use the -store suffix in a more generic,
> > non-Nix way in the future.
>
> Do you have that "more generic", non-Nix store stuff (in the context of
> "project" prefix) in mind?
>
> Without any specific examples, I am afraid the argument "Perhaps someone
> would want to use the -foo suffix in a more generic way in the future"
> is general enough that it applies to any suffix "foo", so general that
> it hardly stands.
>

High command of English is a presumption I made in my own rhetoric (which
merely means persuasion same as your attempt to persuade).  Saying that
something was suggested is an inference, and it did not need to be explicit
hence no words in your mouth from my keyboard.  Omitting -nix in a package
name tied to Nix would be a mistake.  Adding store or not is sugar in this
context since the determination of a directory being a Nix project is
applicable only to a store, IIUC.

My two cents were, I think, both understandable and not ad hominem.  I'm
bowing out of this thread.