From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id wM48IC/jzl/jKAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 02:21:35 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id AJP7Gy/jzl8OSAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 02:21:35 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2EC9940481 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 02:21:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35322 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmSdA-0003xW-GN for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 21:21:32 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51464) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmScK-0003TX-DZ for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 21:20:45 -0500 Received: from mail1.g12.pair.com ([66.39.4.99]:25736) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmSc7-000136-4Q for help-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 21:20:37 -0500 Received: from mail1.g12.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail1.g12.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F8D27308F; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 21:20:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from [10.1.78.70] (pw126166005057.31.panda-world.ne.jp [126.166.5.57]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail1.g12.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2310073077; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 21:20:25 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: Where are suggestions or open discussions of Guix at large made? From: Yasuaki Kudo In-Reply-To: <86sg8h3z9b.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 11:20:22 +0900 Message-Id: <8C609BE0-AE3A-4837-A058-66B77F93FC80@yasuaki.com> References: <86sg8h3z9b.fsf@gmail.com> To: zimoun X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18B92) Received-SPF: none client-ip=66.39.4.99; envelope-from=yasu@yasuaki.com; helo=mail1.g12.pair.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-guix@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: help-guix Errors-To: help-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Help-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.80 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of help-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=help-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: F2EC9940481 X-Spam-Score: -0.80 X-Migadu-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu X-TUID: /jSD0Uwf6aop Hi, Of course, I agree with everything that's said here. That's exactly why I a= m excited about Guix! =20 I think it has a sound mechanism to fine-tune the degree of impurity one wis= hes to accept. What I was thinking was maybe more organizational - is someone coming up to f= orm a group or something =F0=9F=98=84 that provides for a compromised (in-te= rms of accountability and license) yet convenient environment, akin to Ubunt= u, using the fine mechanisms mentioned here? It looks like Guix is creating a ripe environment for a service provider to d= o these things =F0=9F=98=84 Cheers, Yasu > On Dec 8, 2020, at 09:51, zimoun wrote: > =EF=BB=BFHi, >=20 >> On Mon, 07 Dec 2020 at 22:55, znavko@disroot.org wrote: >> Guix repeats the idea of Nix, but realising it more preciously and >> elegantly. >=20 > The word =E2=80=9Crepeat=E2=80=9D is incorrect here. It is more appropria= ted to say: > Guix is based on the idea of Nix or Guix applies similar ideas pioneered > by Nix. >=20 > The divergence is clear enough since the very beginning to not repeat > the confusing / wrong: =E2=80=9CGuix is a fork of Nix implemented in Schem= e=E2=80=9D. >=20 >> It is hard to package some software you like for Guix, >=20 > It depends on how much Love are we ready to put in? :-) >=20 >> but forking guix breaking its elegance for just to install firmware,=20 >> Oracle, Chrome and other stuff is not rational at all, i think. >=20 > The concept of channels avoids to fork and instead allow to extend. It > is possible to extend by adding packages, as the channel guix-past for > instance, or by adding subcommands, as the channel home-manager > illustrates for example. >=20 >=20 >> If you want popular comfortable OS on your home computer, that is not >> idea of Guix. >=20 > Popular is meaningless here. Comfortable, if not then I feel I am > failing and so please point your unpleasant experience and then let=E2=80=99= s > see how to fix it. :-) >=20 >=20 > All the best, > simon