ROADMAP in git tree needs to be updated.

ROADMAP in git tree needs to be updated.

[Omar Radwan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 221 bytes --]

I was browsing the guix git tree the other day, and I was reading the
ROADMAP file, and I found it extremely outdated. It talks about Guix 1.0
being released in time for GNU's 30th anniversary. I think it needs a
rewrite

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 242 bytes --]

Re: ROADMAP in git tree needs to be updated.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Omar Radwan <toxemicsquire4@gmail.com> skribis:

> I was browsing the guix git tree the other day, and I was reading the
> ROADMAP file, and I found it extremely outdated. It talks about Guix 1.0
> being released in time for GNU's 30th anniversary. I think it needs a
> rewrite

Yeah.  (Though it also starts with two paragraphs explaining that this
is historical, and giving a link to a more recent road map.)

I’m tempted to remove the file altogether, because that’s not really the
preferred way to communicate about this, and is bound to become
outdated.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.

Re: ROADMAP in git tree needs to be updated.

[Omar Radwan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1120 bytes --]

>I’m tempted to remove the file >altogether, because that’s not really the
>preferred way to communicate about >this, and is bound to become
>outdated.

I think removing it is a bad idea because a roadmap gives you an idea of
what is planning to be implemented and the goal. Estimations make people
hopeful. And putting in the source tree helps a lot

I think we need to rewrite the roadmap from scratch.
On Dec 29, 2014 1:11 PM, "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:

> Omar Radwan <toxemicsquire4@gmail.com> skribis:
>
> > I was browsing the guix git tree the other day, and I was reading the
> > ROADMAP file, and I found it extremely outdated. It talks about Guix 1.0
> > being released in time for GNU's 30th anniversary. I think it needs a
> > rewrite
>
> Yeah.  (Though it also starts with two paragraphs explaining that this
> is historical, and giving a link to a more recent road map.)
>
> I’m tempted to remove the file altogether, because that’s not really the
> preferred way to communicate about this, and is bound to become
> outdated.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Ludo’.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1511 bytes --]

Re: ROADMAP in git tree needs to be updated.

[Ludovic Courtès]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 298 bytes --]

Omar Radwan <toxemicsquire4@gmail.com> skribis:

> I think we need to rewrite the roadmap from scratch.

In place of a road map, here’s my take at a relatively detailed list of
things that I think we should have for 1.0 to satisfy a range of use
cases, and things that can happen later:


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/x-org, Size: 2144 bytes --]

* Features scheduled for 1.0

  - larger & more robust build farm
    + we need a powerful, dedicated front-end
    + armhf-linux build machine
    + leave Hydra in favor of 'guix publish' + custom code?
  - more OS features
    + LVM support
    + encrypted root
    + configurable name service switch
    + whole-system unit tests, using VMs
  - more service definitions
    + mcron, postfix(?), wicd(?), etc.
  - better 'guix system'
    + 'reconfigure' should be able to restart non-essential services
    + support for '--list-generations' and '--delete-generations'
  - better 'guix pull'
    + using Git to fetch the source instead of re-downloading everything
    + build more quickly
    + install new .mo files and new manual
    + authentication of the Guix source: use signed commits?
  - simplified, purely declarative service list in 'operating-system'
  - GUIs
    + integrate guix-web?
    + guile-ncurses installer?
  - 'guix publish'?

* Features for later

  - complete GNU/Hurd port
  - use content-based addressing when downloading substitutes to reduce
    bandwidth requirements
    + design nar v2 format where file contents are replaced by their hashes
    + leverage /gnu/store/.links
  - binary origin tracking
    + keep signatures in sqlite.db
    + preserve signatures upon import/export
  - peer-to-peer distribution of updates (GNUnet?)
  - more deterministic builds
    + identify & fix sources of non-determinism in builds
    + strengthen guix-daemon containers to further increase reproducibility
    + trusting-trust: bootstrap with different tool chains
    + fixed-point: re-bootstrap until fixed point is reached
    + distributed validation: compare contents of store items with others
      * resist a hydra.gnu.org compromise
  - reproducible containers: mix of 'guix environment' and 'guix system vm'
  - execute code with least privilege
    + build containers like guix-daemon does
    + provide a Plash-like interface in Bash
  - daemon rewritten in Guile
  - more dmd integration
    + monitor network interfaces and start/stop events based on that
    + include a DHCP client written in Scheme


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 513 bytes --]


The second part is particularly unstructured, but that’s because I think
all these items are fairly orthogonal and can happen in any order.  It’s
also non-exhaustive, I’m sure.  :-)

The first part is a list of things IMO required before we can claim to
have reached 1.0.

It’s a bit of a brain dump, but I hope it makes sense.

What do people think?  Anything missing?  Opinions on relative
priorities?

I’m happy to put that into ROADMAP if that is understandable.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: ROADMAP in git tree needs to be updated.

[Ludovic Courtès]

ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:

> In place of a road map, here’s my take at a relatively detailed list of
> things that I think we should have for 1.0 to satisfy a range of use
> cases, and things that can happen later:

Committed.

Ludo’.