| 9 Jun 2023 |
 @syphoxy:matrix.org | haha. yeah. I ninja edited that change just now. | 18:24:30 |
 infinisil | I think the biggest argument against such multi-level structures in general is that they cause ambiguities when the package name is too short. E.g. In a pkgs/A/B structure, where would a itself go? | 18:25:27 |
| infinisil | There are solutions to this, but it's an extra special case that needs to be explained and implemented. | 18:25:59 |
| infinisil | However, with only pkgs/A/B, there's only very few packages that would cause such problems, so it's very minor | 18:26:28 |
 raitobezarius | the pkgs/AB/CD is a classical thing BTW | 18:26:54 |
| @syphoxy:matrix.org | oh. that's an excellent point. I guess if we used underscores.. | 18:27:31 |
| infinisil | Yeah that was one of the suggested ideas for handling this, using some replacement character | 18:27:52 |
| @syphoxy:matrix.org | * oh. that's an excellent point. I guess if we used underscores.. (or maybe prefix with s?) | 18:28:37 |
| @syphoxy:matrix.org | * oh. that's an excellent point. I guess if we used underscores.. | 18:29:21 |
 K900 | How bad of an idea would pkgs/_/AA/BB be | 18:31:31 |
| infinisil | K900: The 2-level 2-prefix sharding would lead to most shards containing very few packages (I should measure this a bit better, but it's recorded as an argument in the RFC) | 18:33:23 |
| K900 | I mostly mean the _ part | 18:33:56 |
| infinisil | K900: Using _ is nice and short compared to unit, though it feels like a hack, similar to how you can do let _ = 0; in _ :P | 18:34:03 |
| infinisil | I guess it's solving the problem of naming though, because then you don't even have a name anymore lol | 18:34:28 |
| K900 | That's the idea, yeah | 18:36:38 |
| K900 | It's sorted first | 18:36:41 |
| K900 | And it's explicitly not a name | 18:36:43 |
| K900 | And it hopefully looks temporary | 18:36:50 |
 hexa | there were arguments against a temporary name, like that moving things around breaks lots of assumptions about backports and out-of-tree usage | 18:37:29 |
| infinisil | Hmm I don't think it should be intended to be temporary. Yes we hope to migrate to something else at some point, but this might also never happen or we completely change the direction. And this is in the scale of perhaps years | 18:38:34 |
| infinisil | Redacted or Malformed Event | 18:50:36 |
 Robert Hensing (roberth) | I don't think we've considered pkgs/by-name yet? | 19:14:03 |
| infinisil | Robert Hensing (roberth): I just thought of pkgs/by-prefix a couple minutes ago :o | 19:14:40 |
| infinisil | Should definitely consider, reminds me of /dev/disk/by-* | 19:15:09 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | yeah, I don't think we'll have many views into the same "structure" like dev has, but I don't think that's an objection | 19:16:08 |
| infinisil | I guess it's also focusing on the structure of it, not the contents, which I don't think is great | 19:16:22 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | that's kind of the point though, because we can't agree on what the contents should be | 19:16:52 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | and we've already acknowledged that we may want to use it for more than packages | 19:17:09 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | and pkgs/by-name does suggest "packages", so that's actually covered | 19:17:35 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | like unit it lends itself to a transposition like by-name/<shard+name>/package. It's really quite similar | 19:18:54 |
