Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Vagrant Cascadian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 753 bytes --]

Every now and then someone stumbles into #guix and ask questions that
I've gleaned over time are off-topic (e.g. non-free software). While I
have a pretty good idea what is appropriate for the channel, it is not
clear to me where that is documentated.

I figured maybe it is referenced in the code of conduct, but then I see
no reference to the code of conduct on https://guix.gnu.org, although it
is in the toplevel directory of guix.git as "CODE-OF-CONDUCT".

Still, the CODE-OF-CONDUCT doesn't really say anything about what is
on-topic for #guix on irc...

It would be helpful to have a link to be able to point to more easily
whenever either subjects come up in the irc channel, ideally somewhere a
little easier to find. :)


live well,
  vagrant

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Yasuaki Kudo]

Or even better, create an alternative community of practitioners who 
don't give a damn (for their purposes)...   Let me know if other people 
also want to create a corruption-admitted-community as well 😁.  We can 
work together.  -Yasu

On 2/20/22 11:33, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> Every now and then someone stumbles into #guix and ask questions that
> I've gleaned over time are off-topic (e.g. non-free software). While I
> have a pretty good idea what is appropriate for the channel, it is not
> clear to me where that is documentated.
>
> I figured maybe it is referenced in the code of conduct, but then I see
> no reference to the code of conduct on https://guix.gnu.org, although it
> is in the toplevel directory of guix.git as "CODE-OF-CONDUCT".
>
> Still, the CODE-OF-CONDUCT doesn't really say anything about what is
> on-topic for #guix on irc...
>
> It would be helpful to have a link to be able to point to more easily
> whenever either subjects come up in the irc channel, ideally somewhere a
> little easier to find. :)
>
>
> live well,
>    vagrant

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[raingloom]

On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 11:41:23 +0900
Yasuaki Kudo <yasu@yasuaki.com> wrote:

> Or even better, create an alternative community of practitioners who 
> don't give a damn (for their purposes)...   Let me know if other
> people also want to create a corruption-admitted-community as well
> 😁.  We can work together.  -Yasu
> 
> On 2/20/22 11:33, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> > Every now and then someone stumbles into #guix and ask questions
> > that I've gleaned over time are off-topic (e.g. non-free software).
> > While I have a pretty good idea what is appropriate for the
> > channel, it is not clear to me where that is documentated.
> >
> > I figured maybe it is referenced in the code of conduct, but then I
> > see no reference to the code of conduct on https://guix.gnu.org,
> > although it is in the toplevel directory of guix.git as
> > "CODE-OF-CONDUCT".
> >
> > Still, the CODE-OF-CONDUCT doesn't really say anything about what is
> > on-topic for #guix on irc...
> >
> > It would be helpful to have a link to be able to point to more
> > easily whenever either subjects come up in the irc channel, ideally
> > somewhere a little easier to find. :)
> >
> >
> > live well,
> >    vagrant  
> 

Something like that already exists for The Channel That May Not Be
Named.

By the way, I think it's kind of silly that that is completely banned
from discussion. When I wanted help on getting my GPU to work, I
mentioned for reference purposes that I tried the proprietary driver
from The Forbidden Channel - and was subsequently warned that I must
not do that. Which I find ridiculous. You can't even discuss results
obtained by running closed source drivers and firmware, so how do you
debug the libre firmwares and drivers, when you have nothing to compare
against?

Also, I think people who want to overwhelmingly use free software but
need proprietary drivers for their computer to function should be
offered better help than "buy a new computer". Currently I'm a mostly
happy user of an AMDGPU based desktop, which lets me create creative
commons artwork in Blender, that I would not be able to do without
proprietary firmware.

I think The Forbidden Channel should be raised to a status similar to
the AUR: it's recognized and its existence is documented, but all
responsibility is very explicitly disclaimed and support is relegated
to special channels.

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Paul Jewell]

> On 21 Feb 2022, at 19:10, raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net> 

> By the way, I think it's kind of silly that that is completely banned
> from discussion. When I wanted help on getting my GPU to work, I
> mentioned for reference purposes that I tried the proprietary driver
> from The Forbidden Channel - and was subsequently warned that I must
> not do that.

I understand that the position taken by guix is more nuanced than that. The project doesn’t seek to control what you run on your computer, but won’t support your choice to run non-free software in the official channels. 

> Which I find ridiculous. You can't even discuss results
> obtained by running closed source drivers and firmware, so how do you
> debug the libre firmwares and drivers, when you have nothing to compare
> against?
But you can discuss these results elsewhere.

> Also, I think people who want to overwhelmingly use free software but
> need proprietary drivers for their computer to function should be
> offered better help than "buy a new computer".

I kind of agree with you here. I don’t want to obsolete perfectly viable hardware, but instead want to use it for its whole life. Next time I am in the market for new hardware, then I will have the ability to run libre-software as a pre-condition for purchase.

> I think The Forbidden Channel should be raised to a status similar to
> the AUR: it's recognized and its existence is documented, but all
> responsibility is very explicitly disclaimed and support is relegated
> to special channels.

Users will find it even the way it is configured today. I don’t think it needs any sort of official recognition or promotion, as that will go against the project goals/rules (as I understand it). We should always be aware of the insidious nature of proprietary firmware/software, and work to eliminate the need for it, rather than indicating that its use is acceptable as a first choice.


Best regards,
Paul

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Yasuaki Kudo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3349 bytes --]

If we were to set up a separate relaxed Guix community that accommodates all forms of corruption, one problem would be the impediments that would exist in communication, especially if the original Guix takes hostile and non-compromising attitude, I think.

If a question arises from that downgraded community how to do this and that, precisely to accommodate some unaccountable  binary black box software, the chances of getting helpful answers may not be so high from the original Guix community. 😅

It is a difficult question - even in the real world the similarities abound.   While it is easy to ignore and isolate North Korea, a country that offers no useful commodity for export (or maybe it does, but let's say, for the sake of argument), countries like Japan have no problem importing Saudi Arabian oil. Ethics and human rights are thrown out the window - oil is considered far more important.

I tend to take the position of strategically 'not caring'  (e.g. https://youtu.be/Blz_Eu00Kbw )

Maybe someone like me is called a Libertarian?  I am not sure... (for the record, my political philosophy seems to be called Anarcho-Syndicalism 😄)

But I still think a parallel community might be in order 😄

-Yasu


> On Feb 22, 2022, at 07:36, Paul Jewell <paul@teulu.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 21 Feb 2022, at 19:10, raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net> 
> 
>> By the way, I think it's kind of silly that that is completely banned
>> from discussion. When I wanted help on getting my GPU to work, I
>> mentioned for reference purposes that I tried the proprietary driver
>> from The Forbidden Channel - and was subsequently warned that I must
>> not do that.
> 
> I understand that the position taken by guix is more nuanced than that. The project doesn’t seek to control what you run on your computer, but won’t support your choice to run non-free software in the official channels. 
> 
>> Which I find ridiculous. You can't even discuss results
>> obtained by running closed source drivers and firmware, so how do you
>> debug the libre firmwares and drivers, when you have nothing to compare
>> against?
> But you can discuss these results elsewhere.
> 
>> Also, I think people who want to overwhelmingly use free software but
>> need proprietary drivers for their computer to function should be
>> offered better help than "buy a new computer".
> 
> I kind of agree with you here. I don’t want to obsolete perfectly viable hardware, but instead want to use it for its whole life. Next time I am in the market for new hardware, then I will have the ability to run libre-software as a pre-condition for purchase.
> 
>> I think The Forbidden Channel should be raised to a status similar to
>> the AUR: it's recognized and its existence is documented, but all
>> responsibility is very explicitly disclaimed and support is relegated
>> to special channels.
> 
> Users will find it even the way it is configured today. I don’t think it needs any sort of official recognition or promotion, as that will go against the project goals/rules (as I understand it). We should always be aware of the insidious nature of proprietary firmware/software, and work to eliminate the need for it, rather than indicating that its use is acceptable as a first choice.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Paul

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5038 bytes --]

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[elais]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4415 bytes --]

> If we were to set up a separate relaxed Guix
> community that accommodates all forms of corruption, one problem would be the impediments that would exist in communication, especially if the original Guix takes hostile and non-compromising attitude, I think.

The discussion at hand is about clarifying what is on topic new channel users, not relaxing a commitment to not promote non free software. A few seconds of searching will almost definitely turn up alternatives if that’s what you’re looking for. That being said I think it would be helpful to add a few sentences to the chat on irc page[1] that clearly state that discussion of non free software is off topic and discouraged in the Channel. I think it will also help if we add the same message to the contacts page[2] as well.

1. https://guix.gnu.org/en/contact/irc/
2. https://guix.gnu.org/contact/


-- Elais Player

On Feb 22, 2022, 04:48 -0700, Yasuaki Kudo <yasu@yasuaki.com>, wrote:
> If we were to set up a separate relaxed Guix community that accommodates all forms of corruption, one problem would be the impediments that would exist in communication, especially if the original Guix takes hostile and non-compromising attitude, I think.
>
> If a question arises from that downgraded community how to do this and that, precisely to accommodate some unaccountable  binary black box software, the chances of getting helpful answers may not be so high from the original Guix community. 😅
>
> It is a difficult question - even in the real world the similarities abound.   While it is easy to ignore and isolate North Korea, a country that offers no useful commodity for export (or maybe it does, but let's say, for the sake of argument), countries like Japan have no problem importing Saudi Arabian oil. Ethics and human rights are thrown out the window - oil is considered far more important.
>
> I tend to take the position of strategically 'not caring'  (e.g. https://youtu.be/Blz_Eu00Kbw )
>
> Maybe someone like me is called a Libertarian?  I am not sure... (for the record, my political philosophy seems to be called Anarcho-Syndicalism 😄)
>
> But I still think a parallel community might be in order 😄
>
> -Yasu
>
>
> > On Feb 22, 2022, at 07:36, Paul Jewell <paul@teulu.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 21 Feb 2022, at 19:10, raingloom <raingloom@riseup.net>
> >
> > > By the way, I think it's kind of silly that that is completely banned
> > > from discussion. When I wanted help on getting my GPU to work, I
> > > mentioned for reference purposes that I tried the proprietary driver
> > > from The Forbidden Channel - and was subsequently warned that I must
> > > not do that.
> >
> > I understand that the position taken by guix is more nuanced than that. The project doesn’t seek to control what you run on your computer, but won’t support your choice to run non-free software in the official channels.
> >
> > > Which I find ridiculous. You can't even discuss results
> > > obtained by running closed source drivers and firmware, so how do you
> > > debug the libre firmwares and drivers, when you have nothing to compare
> > > against?
> > But you can discuss these results elsewhere.
> >
> > > Also, I think people who want to overwhelmingly use free software but
> > > need proprietary drivers for their computer to function should be
> > > offered better help than "buy a new computer".
> >
> > I kind of agree with you here. I don’t want to obsolete perfectly viable hardware, but instead want to use it for its whole life. Next time I am in the market for new hardware, then I will have the ability to run libre-software as a pre-condition for purchase.
> >
> > > I think The Forbidden Channel should be raised to a status similar to
> > > the AUR: it's recognized and its existence is documented, but all
> > > responsibility is very explicitly disclaimed and support is relegated
> > > to special channels.
> >
> > Users will find it even the way it is configured today. I don’t think it needs any sort of official recognition or promotion, as that will go against the project goals/rules (as I understand it). We should always be aware of the insidious nature of proprietary firmware/software, and work to eliminate the need for it, rather than indicating that its use is acceptable as a first choice.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Paul

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6862 bytes --]

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Matt]

 ---- On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 21:33:47 -0500 Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> wrote ----
 > Every now and then someone stumbles into #guix and ask questions that
 > I've gleaned over time are off-topic (e.g. non-free software). While I
 > have a pretty good idea what is appropriate for the channel, it is not
 > clear to me where that is documentated.

I see the following when I connect to #guix:

-ChanServ- [#guix] Welcome to #guix, home of the GNU Guix project! | Be kind
           to everyone. Ground rules:
           <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT> |
           Non-free software is off-topic:
           <https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>
           | Leave messages with sneek: /msg sneek help

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Vagrant Cascadian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2792 bytes --]

On 2022-02-19, matt@excalamus.com wrote:
>  ---- On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 21:33:47 -0500 Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> wrote ----
>  > Every now and then someone stumbles into #guix and ask questions that
>  > I've gleaned over time are off-topic (e.g. non-free software). While I
>  > have a pretty good idea what is appropriate for the channel, it is not
>  > clear to me where that is documentated.
>
> I see the following when I connect to #guix:
>
> -ChanServ- [#guix] Welcome to #guix, home of the GNU Guix project! | Be kind
>            to everyone. Ground rules:
>            <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT> |
>            Non-free software is off-topic:
>            <https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>
>            | Leave messages with sneek: /msg sneek help

I admittedly forget to check the messages from chanserv for channels I
frequent regularly, having personally grown accustomed to the norms of
the channel...

So yes, linking to the Free System Distribution Guidelines implies what
is off-topic, though is still maybe not targeted towards online
communications; it more appears to be written with the audience of
someone making a free software distribution or auditing one. It seems
like the most relevent passage is:

  "A free system distribution must not steer users towards obtaining any
  nonfree information for practical use, or encourage them to do so. The
  system should have no repositories for nonfree software and no
  specific recipes for installation of particular nonfree programs. Nor
  should the distribution refer to third-party repositories that are not
  committed to only including free software; even if they only have free
  software today, that may not be true tomorrow. Programs in the system
  should not suggest installing nonfree plugins, documentation, and so
  on."

People often miss the part about not indirectly referring to non-free
software. Even if pointed to the FSDG, it is admittedly a bit hard to
grasp at times just what exactly constitutes "steer users towards
obtaining any nonfree information for practical use" or how it applies
to, say IRC. Individuals in IRC are not "the distribution", though the
new and long-time community members obviously make up perhaps the most
imporant part of the distribution.


I only bring this up because I regularly see this come up in the IRC
channel, and if an issue frequently comes up, usually that is a sign
that something could be improved in documentation, website, tooling,
etc. ... and when asked for one, I didn't have a good summary to point
to in my toolbox.


Maybe it is now my job to propose something concrete, but I was
curious what others thought before diving into details. :)


live well,
  vagrant

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 227 bytes --]

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Matt]

 ---- On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:36:30 -0500 Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> wrote ----

 > I admittedly forget to check the messages from chanserv for channels I
 > frequent regularly, having personally grown accustomed to the norms of
 > the channel...
 
In my opinion, it's easy to miss.  I had to actively look for it.  I use Emacs erc.  When I start that program and log in, I'm in a buffer for "Libera.Chat". I then do /join #guix. This opens a new buffer, hiding the "Libera.Chat" buffer and showing a new "#guix@Libera.Chat"   buffer. The ChanServ message is printed to the buried "Libera.Chat" buffer.  The "#guix@Libera.Chat" buffer on connect has a giant wall of text showing who's in the chat.  It causes the buffer to scroll to the bottom, hiding anything printed to the top.  Scrolling up, I see some links to various topics. I see no rules or guidelines there.
 
 > So yes, linking to the Free System Distribution Guidelines implies what
 > is off-topic, though is still maybe not targeted towards online
 > communications; it more appears to be written with the audience of
 > someone making a free software distribution or auditing one. It seems
 > like the most relevent passage is:
 > 
 >   "A free system distribution must not steer users towards obtaining any
 >   nonfree information for practical use, or encourage them to do so. The
 >   system should have no repositories for nonfree software and no
 >   specific recipes for installation of particular nonfree programs. Nor
 >   should the distribution refer to third-party repositories that are not
 >   committed to only including free software; even if they only have free
 >   software today, that may not be true tomorrow. Programs in the system
 >   should not suggest installing nonfree plugins, documentation, and so
 >   on."
 > 
 > People often miss the part about not indirectly referring to non-free
 > software. Even if pointed to the FSDG, it is admittedly a bit hard to
 > grasp at times just what exactly constitutes "steer users towards
 > obtaining any nonfree information for practical use" or how it applies
 > to, say IRC. Individuals in IRC are not "the distribution", though the
 > new and long-time community members obviously make up perhaps the most
 > imporant part of the distribution.

I agree, it's hard to miss within the FSDG. Aside from linked (and not on a main screen), it's several sections down within the FSDG. 

 > I only bring this up because I regularly see this come up in the IRC
 > channel, and if an issue frequently comes up, usually that is a sign
 > that something could be improved in documentation, website, tooling,
 > etc. ... and when asked for one, I didn't have a good summary to point
 > to in my toolbox.
 > 
 > 
 > Maybe it is now my job to propose something concrete, but I was
 > curious what others thought before diving into details. :)

I think your observation matches what I've seen and I think your suggestion to address the problem makes sense.  If you know how to and where to do this, great. I wish I could be of more help.  I'm only able to cheer you on and give opinions.

Re: Documentation of what is appropriate for #guix?

[Ludovic Courtès]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1519 bytes --]

Hello!

Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> skribis:

> On 2022-02-19, matt@excalamus.com wrote:
>>  ---- On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 21:33:47 -0500 Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org> wrote ----
>>  > Every now and then someone stumbles into #guix and ask questions that
>>  > I've gleaned over time are off-topic (e.g. non-free software). While I
>>  > have a pretty good idea what is appropriate for the channel, it is not
>>  > clear to me where that is documentated.
>>
>> I see the following when I connect to #guix:
>>
>> -ChanServ- [#guix] Welcome to #guix, home of the GNU Guix project! | Be kind
>>            to everyone. Ground rules:
>>            <https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT> |
>>            Non-free software is off-topic:
>>            <https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-system-distribution-guidelines.html>
>>            | Leave messages with sneek: /msg sneek help
>
> I admittedly forget to check the messages from chanserv for channels I
> frequent regularly, having personally grown accustomed to the norms of
> the channel...

[...]

> Maybe it is now my job to propose something concrete, but I was
> curious what others thought before diving into details. :)

Yes, please propose!  :-)

For the record, the code of conduct is mentioned at
<https://guix.gnu.org/en/contribute/> but not at
<https://guix.gnu.org/en/contact/>.  As a first step, I propose to
address that with the patch below.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Ludo’.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1284 bytes --]

diff --git a/website/apps/base/templates/contact.scm b/website/apps/base/templates/contact.scm
index 7ecd354..49d8393 100644
--- a/website/apps/base/templates/contact.scm
+++ b/website/apps/base/templates/contact.scm
@@ -35,6 +35,26 @@ channels|Bug reports|Help") #\|)
       (@ (class "page centered-block limit-width"))
       ,(G_ `(h2 "Contact"))
 
+      ,(G_
+        `(p
+          "We want to provide a warm, friendly, and harassment-free environment,
+           so that anyone can contribute to the best of their abilities.  To
+           this end our project uses a “Contributor Covenant”, which was adapted
+           from "
+          ,(G_ ((lambda (url)
+                  `(a (@ (href ,url)) ,url))
+                "https://contributor-covenant.org/"))
+          ".  You can find the full pledge in the "
+          ,(G_
+            `(a (@ (href "//git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT")
+                   (class "mono"))
+                "CODE-OF-CONDUCT"))
+          " file."))
+
+      ,(G_
+        `(p "Participation to the project communication channels listed below
+            is subject to this code of conduct."))
+
       ,@(map
 	 contact->shtml
 	 (context-datum context "contact-media"))))))