s/nix style/v2-build/ in the documentation

[phadej]

I conjecture that mentioning Nix only adds confusion. Almost all people I know use v2-build (well actually they use new-build, but maybe v2-build is a bit better).

E.g.

• One of the primary innovations of Nix-style local builds is the distinction between local packages, which users edit and recompile and must be built per-project, versus external packages, which can be cached across projects.

• One of the primary innovations of v2-build local builds is the distinction between local packages, which users edit and recompile and must be built per-project, versus external packages, which can be cached across projects.

[phadej]

An example of confusion: Nix store can (and does) mean /nix/store for a lot of people.

[23Skidoo]

Agreed.

[fgaz]

+1, but it should also mention the other temporary names (nix-style local builds, new-*) so that at least it shows up in searches

[hvr]

But do we want to keep referring to v2-build forever? I assumed we'd phase out the term v2-build to become cabal build, at which point referring to it as v2-build will be more confusing than using the term we've been advertising this feature ever since cabal 1.24 (the term "new-build" and "v2-build" have been rather ephemeral in contrast to the term "nix-style local builds" which has been a constant throughtout time). And I've myself been referring to new-build and v2-build frequently also as "Nix-style" where it made sense (specifically when talking about the nix-style store)

I for one intend to keep referring to "Nix-style {store,hash,build}" (with an emphasis on "-style") where I refer to the concept related to the Nix-style store/hashes, as well as start to slowly phase out my use of "new-build" and "v2-build" in favor of just saying cabal {build,install,*} when I intend to refer to specific commands over the next couple years. In fact, I think it'll cause a lot more confusion to keep talking about the transitional v2-build or new-build terms after cabal 3.0, which is supposed to make the new-* and v2-* prefixes merely a historical artifact which a newcomer coming to cabal 3.0 ought not even need to know about!

[phadej]

I think @hvr did veto this. Nix-style it is.

For the future: don't use number, nor new, not foo-like "relative" references. Find some fancy word, the first thing you'll pick will stick.

[phadej]

Actually no.

https://cabal.readthedocs.io/en/latest/nix-local-build-overview.html starts with

Nix-style local builds are a new build system implementation inspired by Nix. The Nix-style local build system is commonly called “v2-build” for short.

That needs to be changed in the way or another. Either

1. we avoid "v2-build" and use nix-style in non-command-name context
2. or "v2-build" is used in place of informal "nix-style"

Having consistent language would make documentation more polished almost for free.

[hvr]

well, note that

... commonly called “v2-build” for short....

was changed into that wording (back then still for new-build; the rename to v2-build was more recent) in 2017 via c692831 with the express intent to

The goal is to deemphasize calling it "new-build" and push "Nix-style Local
Builds" instead, as the former name only makes sense while the old system
is the default

-``cabal new-build``, also known as Nix-style local builds, is a new
-command inspired by Nix that comes with cabal-install 1.24. Nix-style
-local builds combine the best of non-sandboxed and sandboxed Cabal:
+Nix-style local builds are a new build system implementation inspired by Nix.
+The Nix-style local build system is commonly called "new-build" for short after the ``cabal new-*`` family of commands that control it.
+However those names are only temporary until Nix-style local builds becomes the default.

and also note specifically

However those names are only temporary until Nix-style local builds becomes the default.

[phadej]

Sorry, let me rephrase:

Nix-style local builds have become the default, so some more editing is needed there