Re: advanced?

["Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>]

Hello!

Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> skribis:

> On 2022-11-26, Simon Josefsson via "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." wrote:
>> I find use of the term 'advanced' wrt Guix confusing and even mildly
>> excluding, even though it is wide-spread.  What is advanced about Guix?
>> Can I use it even if I'm not an advanced user?  What do others think?
>> Is there some historical background for this description of Guix?
>
> Thanks for bringing this up!
>
> It does seem consistent with the guix manual section on package synopsis
> and descriptions:
>
>   https://guix.gnu.org/en/manual/devel/en/guix.html#Synopses-and-Descriptions

Indeed.  :-)  I’m fine with the patch Simon submitted and agree with the
rationale.

[...]

>> If we want to use the term, I think it would be better to rephrase
>> things as 'Guix supports advanced features such as X, Y and Z' if we
>> really want to drive home that we are advanced.
>
> This works for me... describe *why* it is advanced rather than just
> proclaiming it.

The second and third points (dependable and hackable) give an idea of
what makes it advanced, so maybe we don’t need to add much?

Or if we do want to explain more, then perhaps we need a list of
features that would also include things like Docker/VM image generation,
declarative home environments, etc.  But that’s broader topic.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

PS: For the record, the phrase “advanced distribution of the GNU system”
    was coined by RMS at a time where he insisted that this thing cannot
    be called “the GNU system”.  All this makes little sense, even less
    so today, but if you’re curious you may enjoy Andreas’ entertaining
    talk: https://10years.guix.gnu.org/video/ten-years-of-failures/