L p R n d n <address@hidden> writes:
Guix is ...
... a package and system manager. (A seen previously, system manager is
too wide)
... a package manager and machine administrator.
... a package and machine administrator.
... a package and environment manager.
WDYT? If anyone has an idea, don't be shy :)
“administrator” is generally understood to be a person (as in “system
administrator”). “environment manager” is just as vague as “system
manager”, in my opinion — “everything is the environment!”. It only
makes sense to people who are already familiar with the term
“environment” in a computing context.
That’s the advantage the word “package manager” has — it’s already a
well-established term, for better or worse.
I'd like to keep the "package manager" part as it'll probably ring a
bell to any linux user and helps understand the not so familiar part
(system/environment dealing).
Right, that’s what I meant.
We are underselling Guix, though, if we keep referring to it as a
“package manager”, because people’s familiarity with other package
managers may make them think in smaller terms.
FWIW, I’m with Ludo here with regards to “Guix” as the “single brand”.
I disagree with this part that George wrote:
"Guix System" is a "bad" name for "GuixSD." Why? Because a new user's
first expectation is for "Guix system" to refer to the whole of Guix,
which we want to call "Guix" (referred to as "Guix Brand" below).
In my experience “… system” is not generally used to describe a tool’s
full set of features. I think “Guix System” is just the right term for
everything that Guix generates or operates on with the “guix system” set
of commands. “GuixOS” is, in my opinion, a pretty terrible name (I’m
also not a fan of all the other “…OS” names out there) and it needlessly
keeps the confusion between “Guix, the tool” and “Guix, the system”
alive.