guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: How to get the package metadata as structured data?


From: Catonano
Subject: Re: How to get the package metadata as structured data?
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 01:40:27 +0200

2016-08-10 14:52 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden>:

Catonano <address@hidden> writes:

> 2016-08-10 13:46 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden>:
>
>>
>> Philippe Ombredanne <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> > David Craven <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >> I aborted, since I realised that guix package -s doesn't include the
>> >> source url and hash, which would be important for a testsuite...
>> >
>> > IMHO, if the rec data is the only way to get to the packages data, the
>> > source url would be rather essential to get in.
>>
>> The recutils output is not the *only* way to access the package data.
>> All packages in Guix are just Scheme variables.  Package data are
>> available as S-expressions and can be read by Scheme programs or parsed
>> by external applications.  The recutils output is just an additional
>> format used when interacting with Guix on the command line.
>>
>> (Personally, I’m not enthusiastic about adding a serialised form of the
>> source field to the recutils output.)
>>
>> ~~ Ricardo
>>
>>
>>
> Not so long ago, someone posted a script that produced a web page with the
> results of linting all the packages
>
> That's an example
>
> One could produce an xml file to be imported in Gephi, just to make another
> example.
>
> Or a SQL text file to be imported in some relational db, or a different
> format to be imported in some not relational db...

I understand that it may be useful.  I just think that the
representation as a Guile Scheme _expression_/value is *already* much more
useful.  That’s what made “guix web” possible, a web interface like this
one:

    http://guix.mdc-berlin.de


Yes, Ricardo, I was not disagreeing with you. I was just trying to offer Philippe some more perspective.

In fact I believe that the approach you envisioned (a cycle through the packages values, leaving only the decompress phase and adding a phase that calls Philippe's tool) has its merits.

Only, if I was Philippe, I would regret storing the output in the store

I'd prefer to be able to store the output in the regular file system

In this regard, I think that the threads about pipelines (for reproducible science), some time ago, were quite interesting

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]