01/01: doc: Follow-up commit to 407ebeaa1.

[guix-commits]

apteryx pushed a commit to branch master
in repository guix.

commit 4183105de08a2403915536a97d06ca0c119487bc
Author: Maxim Cournoyer <address@hidden>
Date:   Tue Aug 27 19:36:05 2019 +0900

    doc: Follow-up commit to 407ebeaa1.
    
    Following some discussion with Ludovic (see:
    https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/2019-08/msg00506.html), it 
is
    better advice to generally recommend the use of `program-file' for any usage
    of modules, not just for those which define syntax.
    
    * doc/guix.texi (Scheduled Job Execution): Drop the following text: "that
    defines syntax (macros)".
---
 doc/guix.texi | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index c1e451f..6499b39 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -12443,10 +12443,10 @@ gexps to introduce job definitions that are passed to 
mcron
 @end lisp
 
 For more complex jobs defined in Scheme where you need control over the top
-level, for instance to introduce a @code{use-modules} form that defines syntax
-(macros), you can move your code to a separate program using the
-@code{program-file} procedure of the @code{(guix gexp)} module
-(@pxref{G-Expressions}).  The example below illustrates that.
+level, for instance to introduce a @code{use-modules} form, you can move your
+code to a separate program using the @code{program-file} procedure of the
+@code{(guix gexp)} module (@pxref{G-Expressions}).  The example below
+illustrates that.
 
 @lisp
 (define %battery-alert-job