Re: Guix (and Guile's) promise, and how to (hopefully) get there

[Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com>]

Hi Ricardo

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Divya Ranjan <divya@subvertising.org> writes:
>
>> Similarly, I would suggest the thoughts on improving Guix/Guile to
>> look at aspects of the project where we might not be doing the best
>> job, or if we can take different steps in terms of reachout. But as an
>> user and contributor, please don’t take steps to separate Guix from
>> GNU. It’ll be a considerable loss too both the projects.
>
> Some of the parts of GNU that really matter to us as Guix are presented
> at <https://gnu.tools>.  The philosophy that was thought up and
> manifested in the early GNU project is what continues to inform our
> technical decisions today: e.g. no distinction between admins and users,
> making software freedom a practical rather than hypothetical freedom,
> giving people [not just developers] the tools to take charge of their
> software needs, etc.
>
> Those of us who have had the displeasure of dealing with the
> *organization* that is called GNU (for example in their role as
> maintainers), however, find it hamstrung by authoritarian governance,
> dominated by a few loud cranks who are given limitless influence in all
> internal discussions, and see their work devalued by tonedeaf statements
> and actions.

> I'm someone who came to Guix because of Scheme and GNU, but as the years
> went on I stayed in *spite* of the association with the entity that GNU
> is now -- luckily, Guix (and with the select links to hackers in other
> GNU-affiliated projects) is a much better embodiment of the early GNU
> philosophy than GNU itself.  That the GNU-internal mailing list that
> contributed significantly to this shift has no public archives is both
> an immeasurable blessing and a curse.

While I guess this list may feel a bit like the Far West at times (I
seldomly participate in it), in that there's little moderation and a few
individuals have loud opinions, I don't think it's fair to label the GNU
people/organization as a whole according to the impression/experience
you've had in this private list.  Most if not all of the interactions
I've had with GNU/FSF people in the last few years have been cordial and
constructive (I'm thinking of the people maintaining the infrastructure,
e.g. on the #savannah channel on IRC or the GNU Debbugs folks, of the
FSF staff sometimes communicating with us co-maintainers, of the Emacs
and other GNU packages people I've dealt with when
reporting/investigating bugs with them, the Linux-libre people, etc.).

I haven't tried convincing the GNU people to review/change their
governance structure, though, which I'm sure would need to be made with
a lot of tact and humility to avoid the issue becoming a "us vs them"
situation.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim