Re: [Dragora-members] Relation of Qi and Qire

[Michael Siegel]

Am 13.06.20 um 00:35 schrieb Matias Fonzo:
> 
> I understood that you want Qire's ability in Qi, but I also understood
> that for a better understanding of both things we should unify or extend
> with appropriate languages since the package managing is something
> complex, as Qi currently works well, maybe there is no need to rewrite
> Qi now (and I hope not :-).

Well, I wasn't meaning to imply that Qi should explicitly include the
ability to do what Qire does. I was just trying to say that I think Qi
should be the way the user invokes those things. I.e., Qi should be able
to make use of Qire seamlessly if that is possible.

> The point of having only one command leads to think that Qi could invoke
> the "extensions" of Qire, by this I meant part of Qire, not the whole
> interface, taking into account everything Qi already has, including the
> documentation format.
> 
> This has the advantage that parts of "Qi" will be in Fennel/Scheme/Lips
> or whatever, while in the future parts or modes of Qi could be replaced
> in the same language (if needed).
> 
> On the other hand, we still don't know how users will interact using qi
> and qire, it might be positive (I hope).

Sorry, but this confuses me even more.

Could you explain the relation of Qi and Qire how you currently envision
it for Dragora 3 once again as if you were trying to explain it to
someone who has no prior knowledge of those things? That will surely
help to cure my confusion.

About rewriting Qi: While I would agree that Qi should not be rewritten
for Dragora 3, I think there is one good reason to rewrite Qi in a more
suitable language at some later point. And that is that, ultimately, Qi
should also offer a GUI, in my opinion.


Michael