Re: GOOPS-less Shepherd

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Bodertz <bodertz@gmail.com> skribis:

> I don't have strong feelings either way, and the change won't really
> affect me too much, but what benefit is there in breaking things?  From
> what I understand from your message, users' configs will stop working in
> a few months when 1.0.x releases (or with the macro would "kinda work"),
> which is at least a short-term con, so what's the long-term benefit of
> this change?  Is GOOPS so bad a thing to require?

It’s not that GOOPS is “bad”.  There are two things: some overhead (not
too bad, but still a bit), and a number of more or less subjective issues.

The programming style GOOPS encourages is not something I enjoy; I think
it makes it harder to reason about the code (you have to think about
applicable methods, new methods can be added at run time, etc.)

Another argument is consistency with Guix, and consistency within the
Shepherd (right now the GOOPS bits feel out of place).

Overall, I think we’d rather “clean things up” before 1.0 so we don’t
have to introduce breakage later.

I hope this clarifies the situation!

Ludo’.