bug#58340: [PATCH v2] gnu: Add passage.

[Tobias Geerinckx-Rice]

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Graves 写道：
> Just as a reminder, this patch cannot be merged before 58340.

Thanks, I realised that after I sent it.  I'll treat (and close) 
them as one bug for this reply.

I've pushed all 3 patches as 
ac553ba68e535810085dd838e48e4fa6ac553e67 et al with the following 
mods:

> * gnu/packages/password-utils.scm (passage): New variable.

I fixed up the commit message to match the name, and addressed the 
following ‘guix lint’ warnings:

 pass-age@1.7.4a0: no article allowed at the beginning of the 
 synopsis
 age@1.0.0: sentences in description should be followed by two 
 spaces

Whilst there, I turned @code{age-encryption.org/v1} into a full 
@url{}, and fixed up upstream's ‘config’ & ‘UNIX’ slang.

> * gnu/packages/golang.scm
>   (age): New variable.
>   (go-filippo-io-cmd-age): New variable.
>   (go-filippo-io-cmd-age-keygen): New variable.
 ^^
Our changelogs are never indented, you'd write:

> * gnu/packages/golang.scm (age, go-filippo-io-cmd-age)
> (go-filippo-io-cmd-age-keygen): New variables.

…but in this case, I was bold and removed the two 
go-filippo-io-cmd-age* packages completely.  I moved ‘age’ to (gnu 
packages password-utils).

The partial recursion in the go-* variants made me nervous (and 
would probably prevent the move, although I didn't try).

If these variants are needed for something, it's not pass-age, and 
we can review them separately if/when needed.  Is that acceptable?

> I would think that choices need to be made

Princip(al)ly: the choice to reuse an existing package name was 
FiloSottile's, for the sake of a pun.  Much as I like bad puns, I 
think that's rather rude.  It's not hard to search for free 
package names, e.g., [0].

> that this one would not annoy a lot.

Technically: it would silently replace users' games with some 
encryption tool.  That's problematic even if those users are few.

Similarly: had the game been added after this ‘passage’, I would 
have grumpily agreed to ‘passage-game’ :-)  But it wasn't.

But: I think your ’pass-age’ solution is perfect.  Thanks! 
FiloSottile should consider it.

Kind regards,

T G-R

[0]: https://repology.org/project/passage/versions

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature