pinoaffe <pinoa...@gmail.com> writes: > If Guix has disposable funds, a GCD of the form "let's use some of those > to set up servers" would make sense to me, or if servers had been > secured "let's use those servers as a binary substitute server" would > make sense, but imo in its current form this GCD lacks actionability: > there's no clarity as to who would do what if this were to be accepted
There are no servers waiting to be deployed that I am aware of, that's why I made the GCD. If people want more substitute servers/faster speeds (which I think they do based on the survey results), the Guix team would need to decide: 1. Who pays for the server (and who owns it) 2. Who pays the recurrent costs. 3. Where the server goes (physically, or what cloud provider) 4. Who (person or group) handles the sysadmin tasks. 5. How these types of decisions get made. Then a timeline can be figured out and things can start moving along.
