From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id mLCYFFrdm2EU9QAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:11:38 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id eGIzEFrdm2GqZAAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 18:11:38 +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 BD3E52D0ED for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:11:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:47872 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpDmz-0001Gu-0G for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 13:11:37 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47516) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpDmV-0001DT-St for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 13:11:07 -0500 Received: from pelzflorian.de ([5.45.111.108]:53596 helo=mail.pelzflorian.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mpDmP-0004jG-OL for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 13:11:07 -0500 Received: from pelzflorian.localdomain (unknown [5.45.111.108]) by mail.pelzflorian.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F2C63606B4; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:10:56 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=pelzflorian.de; s=mail; t=1637604656; bh=jZAmGMN070QAur+gbA4s9eyLP95DbCf5A2IAJYCRIDw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=0P+UfqCYys+quNxl+w9iQsxyDizFuloAX6TMKOyLeaRsy4pAlxufQsOkAA+gia/+R EmuEviYl/UjuwVfQ2XA+5n8+RbCxBjJDdIOee3o2eQwoCVi4WlWGqGqnL8h+dZyA0l d6FzRk+xtfA9kuZrt7PWMMUyzUJtk7JJ0MfG2tGE= Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:10:48 +0100 From: "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" To: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli Subject: Re: ZFS part of Guix? RFC? (Re: Effectively force all GNOME users to locally compile ZFS?) Message-ID: <20211122180255.ipauqebmoiyw4bb3@pelzflorian.localdomain> References: <87r1gfgpjc.fsf@netris.org> <292def7687859350b6f1cd95a8cd385b70bbe830.camel@telenet.be> <87eecfrw25.fsf@nckx> <20211120020940.5efaa2b2@primary_laptop> <87v90no8n1.fsf@nckx> <20211121023324.0a3ba29a@primarylaptop.localdomain> <20211121103548.yi5lo6ymcnm22gfm@pelzflorian.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20211121103548.yi5lo6ymcnm22gfm@pelzflorian.localdomain> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.45.111.108; envelope-from=pelzflorian@pelzflorian.de; helo=mail.pelzflorian.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, raid5atemyhomework@protonmail.com, Domagoj Stolfa Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1637604697; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=xIEGmBJel6qsvNhGhKqZti2tSS+DqmlWsonIGtCJjWc=; b=qboVZHYHNGwoBSg/qSn27GFAqenA0zVACu0JTnEVU7fP23bBUOBXBhe6k9sNDTh+BtM95x vjISC5R3SumBT+vuvlBMWITiHI2cfKMzObJYnGTnlw0sZGp7UeHsWrm+JENlVlUAc6i/Sk y2hcP8GCNIn6cDeAxqvbWZ8YG9c2MXKJojHgTcHYDfVVRqYcYgFnCuEo5p8A3kbdpGeFDW e27PBt/pVOkI5QfzSuQNWhS6lZ3XSFwQBQbcFx/lJnDSgLtSQdqo1wOWeKTnKOPbUmoT/e Sy0RFONvzttC35rlIixyX7j4V8vw5TtcdD4SfGSz8v3+1xb6HQzKTGAalBN6xQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1637604697; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=dbmdcxrkiZoBqAMMW8LFkgOQJiNwGpBp+5q49Ljt8aBbuF1zopts7xbH0bfGRJpypg/vzp KLBbAsZej58PilLml38KNjEgdIIvvaewJ/z8SjAhiV/kmAS2qY7kG6dUOfc0fFVLlgEBAK ELC7E7s5oGAEDqDslA1d2Aq2+I9XaoQFv4NroBp3s1zEv+r+RKHSPyCL6mWVXzfSdCxYFq Zcp0J5E9dBRN37jLvLhXhajUEZSEvUDSCIK27gLn4JPhi7Kh/s2kd9Px9PoOqt4JEMslOC 61fg5mrUXMJpo8KhO0uq1/AGIl7aboU9iHd6f19W1hfC7Yxu6sEUZemZLtbNeg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=pelzflorian.de header.s=mail header.b=0P+UfqCY; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.88 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=pelzflorian.de header.s=mail header.b=0P+UfqCY; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: BD3E52D0ED X-Spam-Score: -1.88 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: NHuNbrYuSevX On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 11:54:15AM +0100, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > raid5atemyhomework wrote patches to add ZFS to Guix > . I put them in CC. That there is > no decision on ZFS and their patches is bad. Maybe their patches > would be for the RFC model to decide? Maybe there is consensus that adding ZFS is a legal risk. There is no consensus on the amount of risk. Are there two camps, - one unwilling to impose any such risk on users (i.e. close as won’t-fix and remove traces of ZFS) - one “Worse is better” camp that likes to move fast and break things? I think of , even though Katherine Cox-Buday did not get involved here at all. Then who decides? I don’t actually care about ZFS myself, but there should be a decision because I think current badly supported ZFS makes people here unhappy. Regards, Florian