Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Taylan Kammer]

On 20.10.2019 05:08, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Taylan Kammer  writes:
>> I'm mostly fond of the Contributor Covenant that was adopted by Guix
> 
> I suggest that we postpone discussion of this proposal for now.  It
> might create more divisions between us, at a time when we should be
> focused on healing our wounds and coming together as a community.  I'd
> be glad to discuss it later.

Hi Mark,

Sure thing.  It seems like I was missing some context here.  I went
straight into discussing details of the CoC because I had (wrongly I
suppose) assumed that the CoC itself is not so controversial.

It should have occurred to me that there's a reason it's not in Guile
yet despite being in Guix for a while. :-)

Sorry if I threw another controversy into the mix at a bad time.

>   Thanks,
> Mark
> 


Kind regards,

- Taylan

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Nala Ginrut]

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 11:10 AM Mark H Weaver  wrote:

> It might create more divisions between us, at a time when we should be
> focused on healing our wounds and coming together as a community.  I'd
> be glad to discuss it later.
>
>
+1
I agree that let's keep friendly just like before, after all, at least in
Guile community, there're no essential conflicts among us.
Some words or proposals may be still meaningful, but maybe delay them after
we healed our wounds by these misunderstandings.
Thank you all!

Best regards.



>   Thanks,
> Mark
>
>

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mark H Weaver]

Taylan Kammer  writes:
> Really, I cannot stress it enough how refreshing it is to see the levels
> of rationality and kindness in the discussions here, when compared to
> most other places on the Internet.

I tend to agree that this is generally a very friendly community.
Obviously this thread has been quite heated, but I think we're handling
it remarkably well, considering.

> I'm mostly fond of the Contributor Covenant that was adopted by Guix

I suggest that we postpone discussion of this proposal for now.  It
might create more divisions between us, at a time when we should be
focused on healing our wounds and coming together as a community.  I'd
be glad to discuss it later.

  Thanks,
Mark

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mikhail Kryshen]

Alex Sassmannshausen  writes:

> Hi Mikhail,
>
> Mikhail Kryshen  writes:
>
>> Andy,
>>
>> If you've long had issues with RMS, then why do you still want to be
>> with GNU?  You don't have to participate in GNU to be part of the free
>> software movement.  Is it that you see GNU as an important platform for
>> your political activism?  Is it about donations?  Identity?  Pride?
>> What is it so significant that it made you stoop to harassment and
>> defamation?  Or could it be that you act purely on emotion under
>> influence of the widespread moral panic?
>
> Andy is doing what he believes is right, like so many other people in
> this debate.  Let's focus on finding a way to maintain the amazing
> community around Guile and Guix, and to carry forward the spirit of GNU.
>
> Please don't impugn the character of others on this mailing list.

Sorry for that.  I admit, I got angry.  But I still have a point, so
let me distill it to the bare minimum of the following two
propositions:

1. Defamation is morally wrong and socially unacceptable.
2. A group of GNU maintainers participated in defamation or at least
   endorsed it.

Andy's message contains defamatory allegations.  The "joint statement"
(which is still present on guix.gnu.org) is vague, but its timing
implies strong relation to the recent defamatory media campaign, and the
signatories neither explained why they decided to do it now, nor
acknowledged it as a mistake.

Thus, I believe that the group of maintainers did a serious misconduct
which undermines trust in them and discredits the community.

And this has nothing to do with personality of RMS or his role in GNU.
Believing that RMS is bad for GNU is not an excuse for such actions.

--
Mikhail


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:29:35AM +, Todor Kondić wrote:
> You know, there is a big IT department within our institution and telling 
> them I will base some serious work on technologies such as GNU  Guile and 
> Guix did raise a few eyebrows (those not raised are probably the cause of 
> their proprietors not being informed enough).
> 
> […]
> Couple of notes:
> 
> 1) Are there any ladies on these lists? I am *dying* to hear from them
> 2) Related to (1) ... a brief look at the maintainers who signed the Joined 
> Statement gives an impression that it leans heavily to the politically 
> Western hemisphere; just a comment, maybe food for thought
> 3) The RMS scandal was brought to my attention by a female coder colleague 
> who previously knew nothing of RMS's, or FSF's or GNU's work in the "Open 
> Source Community"; another nibble for thought
>


There have been few contributions from women,
e.g. 
(I do not know what its status is), but I believe bringing GNU Guile
to professional use could help diversify.  Thank you for that!

Regards,
Florian

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Mark,

Mark H Weaver  skribis:

> RMS has not yet appointed me as a co-maintainer.  To my knowledge, the
> only thing he has done so far is to *ask* me if I wanted to be appointed
> co-maintainer.  I answered "yes", but I've not yet received any further
> messages from him on this topic.  I also note that I'm not listed as a
> maintainer in the official list of maintainers.

Thanks for clarifying, Mark.  In the current context, I, like others
here, find this action of RMS very problematic.  Far from helping
deescalate tensions, it has evidently poured oil onto the fire and moved
the conflict to Guile, which until now was a safe harbor far away from
the private GNU mailing lists.

It has also complicated our relation, though I’m happy the discussion
we’re having is helping avoid misunderstandings and misconceptions.

Ludo’.

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Thompson, David]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 9:33 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber
 wrote:
>
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
> > [resending with fixed headers, for proper threading]
> >
> > Hi Christopher,
> >
> > Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
> >> I think *RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without
> >> notifying or asking the other maintainers
> >
> > Did you not see my recent correction about this?  I CC'd you,
> > but maybe something went wrong.  Please see:
> >
> >   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00031.html
> >
> > I'll respond to the rest of your post in a future message.
>
> Oh, I didn't see it... my mistake.  (I am in extreme email backlog mode,
> but that's no excuse: I should have read the rest of the thread before
> posting.)
>
> I appreciate you clarifying this and do find that dramatically less
> jarring than if there was a unilateral appointment.

Yes, this is less worrisome.  All I wish is that the maintainer team
be built on mutual respect and cooperation rather than the divine
appointments of a dictator.  I hope everyone can come to an agreement.

- Dave

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Christopher Lemmer Webber]

Mark H Weaver writes:

> [resending with fixed headers, for proper threading]
>
> Hi Christopher,
>
> Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
>> I think *RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without
>> notifying or asking the other maintainers
>
> Did you not see my recent correction about this?  I CC'd you,
> but maybe something went wrong.  Please see:
>
>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00031.html
>
> I'll respond to the rest of your post in a future message.

Oh, I didn't see it... my mistake.  (I am in extreme email backlog mode,
but that's no excuse: I should have read the rest of the thread before
posting.)

I appreciate you clarifying this and do find that dramatically less
jarring than if there was a unilateral appointment.

 - Chris

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Christopher,

Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
> I think *RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without
> notifying or asking the other maintainers

Did you not see my recent correction about this?  I CC'd you,
but maybe something went wrong.  Please see:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00031.html

I'll respond to the rest of your post in a future message.

Regards,
  Mark

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Christopher Lemmer Webber]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:

> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> Andy Wingo  writes:
>>> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
>>> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
>>> to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions and
>>> shipped them in the 2.9.4 release;
>>
>> The funny thing is, I don't actually have a strong opinion on this
>> particular change.
>>
>> What I *do* have a strong opinion on is that you made the decision
>> unilaterally, without discussion on the mailing list
>
> I have been worrying a bit about this change because I do not see how to
> implement it in Mes.  I did not speak up because I believe that our
> bootstrapping efforts should not hold Guile development back.
>
>> Ludovic and I only found out about the change after the public
>> announcements had already been made.
>>
>> Can you understand why I consider this behavior to be dictatorial?
>
> Yes, I can see that now.  However, having met Andy I could not have
> imagined that something like that could have been his motivation.  It
> would be great if we all could spend some time together.
>
>> For what it's worth, despite our disagreements, I still sincerely
>> believe that you are acting in good faith, and fighting for what you
>> believe is right.  I hope that you can believe that I'm doing the same.
>
> When you left that was pretty discouraging for me: I enjoyed and much
> appreciated your recent help with the Guix bootstrap.  Thank you for
> that!  I am happy you have decided to come back.

Mark played a major role in me learning and being welcomed into both the
Guile and Guix communities so I also felt sad to see him go (especially
in Guix, where I've followed his contributions more closely than in
Guile itself).  I will also say: I don't want to see the Guile/Guix
community shaken apart.  IMO Guile and Guix have been the most positive
communities in GNU in my experience over the last 5 years; I'd like to
see it remain that way.

That said, I think there are two things that are being mixed up in here
simultaneously, and it's making the situation more confusing.  There's
the technical decision-making that Mark is upset by which, I will take
it at face value that this is why Mark wanted to come back as
co-maintainer.  There also is what appears to be what appears to be
retaliation for Andy being one of the people speaking up (I am also one,
but Andy has been more visible given his blogpost) about the governance
problems in GNU and RMS's role in them.

Again, even if Mark's concerns were more about the former issue (the
technical decisionmaking of the project, which it turns out is also a
balancing governance vs who-is-doing-the-work discussion), I think
*RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without notifying or
asking the other maintainers lead to the "could the rug be pulled out
from me at any time?" response many GNU developers/maintainers
(including myself) read into it.  Even if that's what Mark's concern was
(I never saw the internal GNU discussion lists), that definitely created
confusion.

Now to return to the issue of technical decisionmaking in Guile.  For
better or for worse, I think it's true that Andy is the main person
applying hack energy to the Guile codebase.  Mark, I understand your
concern that Andy hasn't communicated clearly the changes he was making
beforehand, and maybe we can improve things there.  Is there a way we
can do that without also applying "stop energy" to that work at large?
I am worried also that language such as calling someone a dictator of
Guile isn't a constructive way to go about it.

 - Chris

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Alex Sassmannshausen]

Hello,

pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)  writes:

> This is very sad.  I appreciate the enormous time investments of all
> of you for Guile.  When you make a decision, I hope you understand the
> other.
>
> Regards,
> Florian

Many incredibly thoughtful emails have been sent to the mailing list on
this subject, and I will struggle to communicate ideas any more clearly
than has been done so far.

I have enormous respect for the work that RMS carried to bring Free
Software, and indeed GNU, into the world.  It is possible to recognise
the great deeds of a person whilst realising they are flawed, like the
rest of us; or that they have also done less than desirable things.

It is possible to believe RMS has done great work, and to believe that
maybe he is not the right person to lead the FSF or GNU.  If you start a
movement, you must realise that at some point you might find yourself no
longer the leader of it.

I believe that if different people, over a long period of time, keep
expressing similar worries about a person, then we need to listen to
those people.

But all the above points are really only tangentially related to the
present conversation.  Here, we are concerned with the wonderful
community that exists right now around Guile and Guix.  And I want this
community to continue to exist, and grow and retain its momentum.

We are all responsible for the wonderful community we have here, and the
way that this debate has taken place on these lists, when compared to
others I have seen is testament to this.

As for the disagreements between the past and present maintainers, I
have enormous respect for all of you, and hope you can together come to
an agreement on how to proceed.  I do believe there is sufficient space
in our community for different perspectives.  We should always start
from a commitment to doing what's right and to ensuring our space is
welcoming to people from all walks of life.

Best wishes,

Alex

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Alex Sassmannshausen]

Hi Mikhail,

Mikhail Kryshen  writes:

> Andy,
>
> If you've long had issues with RMS, then why do you still want to be
> with GNU?  You don't have to participate in GNU to be part of the free
> software movement.  Is it that you see GNU as an important platform for
> your political activism?  Is it about donations?  Identity?  Pride?
> What is it so significant that it made you stoop to harassment and
> defamation?  Or could it be that you act purely on emotion under
> influence of the widespread moral panic?

Andy is doing what he believes is right, like so many other people in
this debate.  Let's focus on finding a way to maintain the amazing
community around Guile and Guix, and to carry forward the spirit of GNU.

Please don't impugn the character of others on this mailing list.

Best wishes

Alex

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Jan,

Jan Nieuwenhuizen  writes:

> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> Andy Wingo  writes:
>>> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
>>> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
>>> to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions and
>>> shipped them in the 2.9.4 release;
>>
>> The funny thing is, I don't actually have a strong opinion on this
>> particular change.
>>
>> What I *do* have a strong opinion on is that you made the decision
>> unilaterally, without discussion on the mailing list
>
> I have been worrying a bit about this change because I do not see how to
> implement it in Mes.

There's a straightforward way to translate a body containing mixed
definitions and expressions into a 'letrec*'.  It's illustrated in the
commit log, and in the manual:

  
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?id=20535922147cd5992330962aaa5c4986563fc905
  
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/tree/doc/ref/api-binding.texi?id=5284b9b9c6cecc404a912acaefce2b883ac0dbba#n284

  Mark

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Nala Ginrut]

hi Andy, I think Mark has explained something, I hope you can rethink about
it calmly. It seems a misunderstanding.

A decade ago I came to Guile community, and I've learned many things from
the people here. Andy, Mark, and Ludo are the people I really respect.
However, someday if they start to blame each other, what can I do now?
No one can keep a very good relationship after so many years of
cooperation. Obviously, in a cooperation relationship, there're always
compromises and misunderstandings.

I think I can understand why many people dislike RMS. When I become a GNU
maintainer and start the first conversation, I realized RMS is not so easy
to talk.
IIRC, when I first time to contact RMS with mails, at least the first 20
private emails are quarrels. ;-)
However, I still find a way to work with him, because I think his paranoia
is the essential factor to push free software so far.

So if anyone dislikes RMS because of that, I fully understand you and I
don't think you have to endure. You may find your way out.
But I don't think the moral concerns and personal life should affect a
technical community. We're different people from different cultures.
Please let me remind that LGBT was considered immoral previously. Let's be
more diversity.

I gradually realized that people blame RMS recently is not because of his
misinterpreted comments, it's trivial, just an excuse. I think some people
just can't endure RMS, that's the essential reason. I don't know, I'm not
sure any new leader of GNU was elected, whether she/he will be still blamed
like this, after all, no one is perfect.

To my understanding, Guile is very important for GNU operating system. And
we've helped to push it so far till today. Are we doing it wrong?
If Guile quit GNU, then what's its position? IMHO, Guile is on a very good
track these years. If Guile quit GNU, is it competitive enough to other
Scheme implementation?

I'm the kind of pragmatism people. I hope you can think about it carefully.
After all, the decision includes all our efforts for many years.

But anyway, any of you will not lose my respect. Because I don't think
anyone is wrong here, you just try to insist on your faith kindly.

Best regards.



On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 9:08 AM Mark H Weaver  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I just realized that I made a mistake, and my mistake has caused people
> to strongly condemn RMS for something that he did not actually do.
>
> RMS has not yet appointed me as a co-maintainer.  To my knowledge, the
> only thing he has done so far is to *ask* me if I wanted to be appointed
> co-maintainer.  I answered "yes", but I've not yet received any further
> messages from him on this topic.  I also note that I'm not listed as a
> maintainer in the official list of maintainers.
>
> I misinterpreted RMS's question as an offer, and that was my mistake.
> The fault is mine, and mine alone.  RMS should not be blamed for it.
>
>Mark
>
>
> Andy Wingo  wrote:
> > Still, it was with surprise that I woke up this morning to a request
> > from Mark to re-join the Guile project on Savannah, saying that RMS had
> > appointed Mark to become co-maintainer, and that Mark assented -- "given
> > recent events".
> >
> > Now, Richard has no idea about Guile or how it works either technically
> > or socially, and has not consulted with me as Guile maintainer, nor to
> > my knowledge did he consult with Ludovic.
>
> "Thompson, David"  wrote:
> > But now that I know that the truth is that RMS, as chief nuisance, put
> > Mark back into this role without the consent of either active Guile
> > co-maintainer, and without even telling them, I am extremely
> > disappointed and I do not approve.
>
> Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
> > I'm extremely saddened to see RMS pull this move.  It seriously
> > undermines faith for maintainers of GNU projects that ther is any
> > semblance of fair governance, and that the rug can't be pulled out from
> > under their feet at any time.
>
>

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mikhail Kryshen]

Andy,

If you've long had issues with RMS, then why do you still want to be
with GNU?  You don't have to participate in GNU to be part of the free
software movement.  Is it that you see GNU as an important platform for
your political activism?  Is it about donations?  Identity?  Pride?
What is it so significant that it made you stoop to harassment and
defamation?  Or could it be that you act purely on emotion under
influence of the widespread moral panic?

You are trying to publicly destroy a person for his opinions that you
chose to interpret in the most unfavorable way possible.  But consider
that your interpretations are wrong — just the possibility of it makes
your actions totally morally unacceptable.

I respect you as a programmer and contributor to free software, but this
act of yours is a severe disgrace.

-- 
Mikhail


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

Please don't ask for a fork in Guix.  Forking is not a desirable
outcome.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > They published their "Joint Statement" on gnu.org because they know they
  > have support from a faction of the FSF board.

I don't think so.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Mark H Weaver writes:

> Andy Wingo  writes:
>> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
>> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
>> to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions and
>> shipped them in the 2.9.4 release;
>
> The funny thing is, I don't actually have a strong opinion on this
> particular change.
>
> What I *do* have a strong opinion on is that you made the decision
> unilaterally, without discussion on the mailing list

I have been worrying a bit about this change because I do not see how to
implement it in Mes.  I did not speak up because I believe that our
bootstrapping efforts should not hold Guile development back.

> Ludovic and I only found out about the change after the public
> announcements had already been made.
>
> Can you understand why I consider this behavior to be dictatorial?

Yes, I can see that now.  However, having met Andy I could not have
imagined that something like that could have been his motivation.  It
would be great if we all could spend some time together.

> For what it's worth, despite our disagreements, I still sincerely
> believe that you are acting in good faith, and fighting for what you
> believe is right.  I hope that you can believe that I'm doing the same.

When you left that was pretty discouraging for me: I enjoyed and much
appreciated your recent help with the Guix bootstrap.  Thank you for
that!  I am happy you have decided to come back.

Greetings,
jannneke

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.com

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Andy,

Andy Wingo  writes:
> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
> to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions and
> shipped them in the 2.9.4 release;

The funny thing is, I don't actually have a strong opinion on this
particular change.

What I *do* have a strong opinion on is that you made the decision
unilaterally, without discussion on the mailing list, and without even
consulting your co-maintainers.  The commit was pushed to Savannah less
than 6 hours before you publicly announced a new Guile release that
included this core language change:

  
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?id=20535922147cd5992330962aaa5c4986563fc905
  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-08/msg00016.html

Ludovic and I only found out about the change after the public
announcements had already been made.

Can you understand why I consider this behavior to be dictatorial?

> I responded over email asking to talk about the issues;

This is misleading, because in fact you flatly refused to even discuss
the issue of *process*, namely that you made the decision unilaterally.
Instead, you insisted on limiting the discussion to the merits of the
actual change, after it had already been made, included in a release,
and publicly announced.

This kind of thing has happened several times in the past, and you've
always responded the same way, flatly refusing to talk about process,
and insisting on limiting the conversation to the merits of the changes
you had already made.

> in response a
> week later I see that he resigned from maintainership and left the
> Guile group on Savannah.  It was truly a shame for Guile, as Mark is
> an excellent hacker and has done a lot of good work for Guile.

I regret quitting the project.  The bus factor of Guile is far too low,
and it's a very important project.

I was angry.  I think I had a right to be angry.  After 8 years working
on Guile, and 5 years as your co-maintainer, your actions felt extremely
disrespectful to me.  Can you understand why I would feel that way?

> It's true also that, mixed with the sadness, I felt a modicum of relief.
> It has never been easy to work with Mark.  I could toil on Guile for
> weeks, taking time away from my family, and then wake up to receive a
> private mail excoriating me for my work.

I did not excoriate you for your work.  Rather, I complained bitterly
about being blindsided by changes that you included in the 2.2.0 release
against my wishes.

Still, I should have balanced my complaints with congratulations for
your contributions.  I'm sincerely sorry that I failed to do that.  I
didn't have it in me at the time, and your refusal to talk about process
left an open wound that has festered and never really healed.

> Yesterday, on internal project-wide GNU mailing lists, Mark brought up
> his personal grievances with me, arguing that the only reason I was
> ignoring RMS was because, in his opinion, RMS is the only person that
> could stop me from being Guile Dictator For Life; that I was attacking
> Richard out of some kind of hypocritical, tyrannical megalomania.

This is a severe mischaracterization of what I actually wrote.

First of all, I never said that it was the "only reason", or even that
it was "a reason".  I merely said that you had an "interest" in deposing
Richard, by which I meant that you had something to gain from it.

Secondly, there was a specific purpose to raising my grievances on the
internal mailing list.  It's because you are vigorously arguing for
collective decision making within GNU, while at the same time you are
acting in a dictatorial manner within the Guile project, failing to even
consult your co-maintainers on core language changes.  I think that's
hypocritical, and I said so.

> Still, it was with surprise that I woke up this morning to a request
> from Mark to re-join the Guile project on Savannah, saying that RMS had
> appointed Mark to become co-maintainer, and that Mark assented -- "given
> recent events".
>
> Now, Richard has no idea about Guile or how it works either technically
> or socially, and has not consulted with me as Guile maintainer, nor to
> my knowledge did he consult with Ludovic.

The facts are plain.  The bus factor in Guile is shockingly low.
Ludovic's attention is almost entirely focused on Guix, and he hasn't
worked much on the compiler since the 2.0 days.  A lot has changed since
then, as you and I both know.  Besides you, I'm the only person in the
world who is able to work on contemporary Guile compiler internals.

> I don't know what to conclude about RMS's motivations -- is it
> retaliation?

A stronger case can be made that your attempt to block my return to this
project is retaliatory.

You might be comfortable with a bus factor of close to 1 on modern Guile
compiler internals, but that would be an irresponsible decision on your

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Adrienne G. Thompson]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 4:56 PM Tadeus Prastowo  wrote:

> Dear Andy,
>
> Could you kindly move
> https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ to
> your own site, please?


They published their "Joint Statement" on gnu.org because they know they
have support from a faction of the FSF board. It's all part of the "board
game".

:)

Adrienne
-- 
Freedom - no pane, all gaiGN!

GNU C-Graph - http://www.gnu.org/software/c-graph
Code Art Now - http://codeartnow.com
Abertheid Campaign - http://www.abertheid.info
Follow me on Twitter @AdrienneGT @GNUcgraph

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Linus Björnstam]

Hi Andy!

Your work (and amazing blog) and the wonderful work by the GUIX team is what 
brought me to guile. I don't have any I'll feelings towards Mark (I have 
appreciated his support on the mailing list many times), but I will follow 
Guile wherever you and Ludo take it, inside or outside the GNU project.

I am but a lowly hobby programmer (who found a home in scheme) soI don't think 
I can contribute much in either case, but if financial support for hosting is 
needed I can contribute to that. Apart from trying my best to help people in 
the IRC channel.


Thank you for your work.
-- 
  Linus Björnstam

On Wed, 16 Oct 2019, at 15:14, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> In the last few weeks, a conversation among GNU maintainers that has
> been simmering for years burst into public.  For a while it resubmerged
> into private GNU lists, but now it has resurfaced to affect the Guile
> project.
> 
> Just for background information, I wrote about my thoughts here:
> 
>   https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu
> 
> The summary is that, like many people in GNU, I have long treated
> Richard Stallman not as a hero, not as a leader, but rather a "missing
> stair" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_stair) that one has to
> route around.  This approach was never very inclusive -- if you don't
> have much experience in GNU, it's possible to not know about it, and to
> fall in the hole yourself.  On the other hand if you know of RMS but not
> Guile, you might think that Guile developers support RMS.
> 
> However, recent events made me realize this approach was not only unfair
> to newcomers, but unjust as well, as by continuing to work on GNU and
> not saying anything, I was both lending unmerited prestige to RMS,
> enabling his creepy behavior towards women, and additionally, enabling
> his apparent pedophilia-advocacy.
> 
> Regarding this latter point, I wasn't really aware that this was a view
> RMS was promoting, but I am ashamed to admit that I had heard rumors
> that Richard publically advocated sex between adults and teenagers,
> defended sexual harassers, and questioned the experience of victims of
> sexual assault, and I preferred not to listen.  Looking again, and I
> think Richard's web site speaks for itself:
> 
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20170612074722/http://stallman.org/archives/2017-mar-jun.html#26_May_2017_(Prudish_ignorantism)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180131020215/https://stallman.org/archives/2017-jul-oct.html#29_October_2017_(Pestering_women)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180104112431/https://www.stallman.org/archives/2017-nov-feb.html#27_November_2017_(Roy_Moore's_relationships)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180509120046/https://stallman.org/archives/2018-mar-jun.html#30_April_2018_(UN_peacekeepers_in_South_Sudan)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180911075211/https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#17_July_2018_(The_bullshitter's_flirting)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180911075211/https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#21_August_2018_(Age_and_attraction)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180924231708/https://stallman.org/archives/2018-jul-oct.html#23_September_2018_(Cody_Wilson)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20181113161736/https://www.stallman.org/archives/2018-sep-dec.html#6_November_2018_(Sex_according_to_porn)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20190325024048/https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jan-apr.html#14_February_2019_(Respecting_peoples_right_to_say_no)
>   
> https://www.stallman.org/archives/2019-may-aug.html#11_June_2019_(Stretching_meaning_of_terms)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20190801201704/https://stallman.org/archives/2019-may-aug.html#12_June_2019_(Declining_sex_rates)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20190801201704/https://stallman.org/archives/2019-may-aug.html#30_July_2019_(Al_Franken)
>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20190903050208/https://stallman.org/archives/2019-jul-oct.html#27_August_2019_(Me-too_frenzy)
> 
> Anyway.  So far, so GNU.  A couple weeks ago I thought it an opportune
> moment to declare publicly the views that I have long held privately:
> that I do not consider RMS to be the leader of GNU, and that GNU
> maintainers and other developers with a stake in the project should
> organize to fill the void.
> 
>*  *  *
> 
> I pause here to mention that you may not agree with this perspective and
> that is fine.  There are many ways that we can continue to work together
> while this discussion plays out.  Part of the purpose of this mail
> though is to make it clear that there are differences of opinion and
> that the GNU project is in flux.
> 
>*  *  *
> 
> Now we get to how this issue affects Guile.
> 
> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
> to be consulted before I 

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Tadeus Prastowo]

Dear Andy,

Could you kindly move 
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ to your own 
site, please?

As Jean said, you (and/or Ludovic) should not have published the petition under 
gnu.org in the first place, to quote Jean [1]:

To publish his political opinions where Ludovic Courtès is defaming and 
harassing Richard Stallman on his own domain is disgraceful and shameful 
activity! That would be like me to kick my own mother in her stomach.

End quote.

Every family has their own weaknesses, but experiencing how broken one's family 
is not an excuse to kick one's own parents from the house that the parents have 
built with their own hands.  If one no longer wishes to live with their own 
parents, they definitely are free to leave their own parents and go out of 
their parents' houses.

Therefore, I implore you to take down 
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ from a 
subdomain of gnu.org, hand over the maintenance of the GNU Guix project to 
Mark, resign from the GNU Guix project (leave your parent and go out of your 
parent's house), and set up your own site and repository to fork the GNU Guix 
project (build your own house now with your own hands, which is the right and 
fair thing to do instead of kicking your own parent out from their own house).

Lastly, I implore you to ask those who have signed 
https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/ to follow 
suit.  For example, those GCC folks can definitely have the money of their own 
organizations jointly to fork GCC, no?  If not, then they should remove their 
signature from that joint statement, unless you have moved that statement out 
from under the gnu.org.  Fair, isn't it?

Thank you.

[1] 
https://gnu.support/richard-stallman/Ludovic-Court%C3%A8s-Guix-is-accusing-Stallman-of-Thoughtcrime-on-his-own-domain-GNU-org.html

--
Best regards,
Tadeus

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Jean Louis]

This is response to:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg5.html

Dear Andy,

No, I do not think that conflicst affect GNU Guile. I think you are
the one affecting GNU Guile and GNU community and Guix community.

That you are now using Guile mailing list to promote defamation of RMS
and to mix private political opinions of Dr. Richard Stallman with GNU
Guile project is disgrace.

GNU project is apolitical and never was political.

Dr. Richard Stallman has his blog and political views outside of the
GNU Project and FSF and those views do not represent neither GNU nor
FSF.

You have your own blog outside of the GNU project, so please stick to
your blog, write your stuff outside, do not send stuff to GNU Guile
list.

It was you who started mixing Guix with politics, and you and Ludovic
Courtès who started mixing jokes with feminism, feminism with GNU and
so on.

Please refer to GNU kind communication guidelines to stick to free
software philosophy. Your blog does not show that you are promoting
free software philosophy, you promote software, but not free software
philosophy, and I can by that way think of you as only as programmer.

Yet your logical skills and research skills are down to zero related
to Dr. Richard Stallman.

Your integrity is down to zero, as instead that you appreciat all the
donations and facilities as provided by RMS as that is his creation,
you are spitting and dividing the same community that you are
pretending to support.

You are traitor of the GNU project and GNU communication guidelines.

You are traitor of Guix good code of conduct that shall create
harassment friendly environment.

* Andy Wingo  [2019-10-16 09:14]:
> In the last few weeks, a conversation among GNU maintainers that has
> been simmering for years burst into public.  For a while it resubmerged
> into private GNU lists, but now it has resurfaced to affect the Guile
> project.

Please do not generalize, those are not "GNU maintainers" those are
few people who have been invited by Andy Wingo, you and your good
friend Ludovic Courtès to join on the rumor mongering accusation
inflation that you have published on Guix pages.

That is disgrace for you personally, disgrace for Ludo, disgrace for
Guix and GNU and the FSF. 

> Just for background information, I wrote about my thoughts here:
> 
>   https://wingolog.org/archives/2019/10/08/thoughts-on-rms-and-gnu

And I have written responses on that, so why not have some balls and
refer to responses as well?

See: 
https://www.reddit.com/r/gnu/comments/dgelag/thoughts_on_rms_and_gnu_wingolog/f3eglgb/

You have no arguments really to backup your accusations.

> The summary is that, like many people in GNU, I have long treated

I am sorry, please stop with generalizations in your statements.

Saying "many people" is anti-social characterization, please be
specific and name people, do not give false impression that many
people support you, as they don't.

> However, recent events made me realize this approach was not only unfair
> to newcomers, but unjust as well, as by continuing to work on GNU and
> not saying anything, I was both lending unmerited prestige to RMS,
> enabling his creepy behavior towards women, and additionally, enabling
> his apparent pedophilia-advocacy.

That is incorrect. That is your twisted and biased opinion which has
foundation in your educational background. I have got impression that
you have never ever understood what free speech means. And you have
not legally understood what is defamation and slander of character.

You are bringing criminal acts into GNU Guile mailing list. Please
refrain doing so.

> Regarding this latter point, I wasn't really aware that this was a view
> RMS was promoting, but I am ashamed to admit that I had heard rumors
> that Richard publically advocated sex between adults and teenagers,
> defended sexual harassers, and questioned the experience of victims of
> sexual assault, and I preferred not to listen.

Your statements are generalized, twisted and distorted. You are doing
this only to justify the harm you have done to the community and to
make your "right" in your own eyes.

You have betrayed the principles of good behavior in the community,
you have harmed both Guix, and GNU, and Guile community and you are
only trying to justify and "prove" how right you are.

I do believe you are good person, truly I do, I just know that you are
young and naive, and I am kicking my head into the wall for reasons
that one programmer like you cannot differentiate what RMS really
said. As I considered programmers always in general having sense of
logics and differentiation.

To differentiate is a test of intelligence.

To identify things with each other, without seeing differences is a
test of stupidity.

>   
> https://web.archive.org/web/20170612074722/http://stallman.org/archives/2017-mar-jun.html#26_May_2017_(Prudish_ignorantism)
>   
> 

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

This is very sad.  I appreciate the enormous time investments of all
of you for Guile.  When you make a decision, I hope you understand the
other.

Regards,
Florian

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

Hi Andy, Ludovic and everyone else,

As a previous co-maintainer of Guile, it saddens me that you/we have run
into these kind of difficulties. It's especially sad since, as also David
wrote, Guile has always been a project with a friendly atmosphere. What I
wish for is that everyone involved in this conflict make their best effort
to find a good way forward, and in particular, a way that can preserve the
valuable social assets of Guile.

My own viewpoint of recent events around RMS is that he is a special kind
of person with his own kind of strengths and weaknesses. Yes, it's quite
clear that project leadership and management is not his strength, but at
the same time he is the root of the free software movement with a fantastic
legacy. I'm also fascinated by how often what he has said, and which at the
time might have caused many rolling eyes, eventually have turned out to be
correct. So, also here, I'm sad that there is not enough room in present
day society to accommodate a person like RMS. I would have wished for him
to end celebrated. Even though I'm myself strongly for the causes of women
and obviously completely against any form of child abuse, I think that it
is possible to disagree with some of RMS statements without judging him too
harshly. I take a risk in saying that it is certainly possible to see his
perspective and arguments in his defence of Minsky, even if one disagrees
and thinks that he has left some aspects of the situation out.

Then there is the question of leadership. I don't think that it was good
timing of the GNU maintainers to go forward with their initiative at this
precise point in time. But I welcome it in other respects and now that it
is out in the open, I think you maintainers should go forward with it and
try to achieve a more reasonable governing structure in GNU. I wish you
good luck with that. With the timing you chose it will be harder, but I
hope for you to succeed.

Regarding Guile, I have a very high confidence in Andy and Ludovic and
think the Guile project should regard itself very lucky to have such
maintainers. I wasn't aware of the differences between Andy and Mark and
also have a very high appreciation of Mark's careful work. But I think it
is clear to most people that it is not good leadership by RMS to appoint
Mark as co-maintainer without consulting with Andy and Ludovic. Under
normal circumstances, a leader can do such things, but given the current
situation, with the well motivated request for a new governing structure,
my point of view is that it is Andy and Ludovic who currently rows this
boat.

Andy and Ludovic, you have my full support. Please stick with Guile, but
please also keep your calm and talk a lot to key people to try to resolve
this situation in a good way (which of course does not mean letting your
hands be tied).

Best regards,
Mikael

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Jean Louis]

* Christopher Lemmer Webber  [2019-10-16 11:33]:
> I agree with everything Andy and David have written, so I'm not sure how
> much to rehash here.
> 
> I'm extremely saddened to see RMS pull this move.  It seriously
> undermines faith for maintainers of GNU projects that ther is any
> semblance of fair governance, and that the rug can't be pulled out from
> under their feet at any time.

What means "fair" to you?

Jean Louis

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Jean Louis]

* Thompson, David  [2019-10-16 10:12]:
> Now, onto the present.  Seeing Mark step down from as a Guile
> co-maintainer was an indicator that something was amiss internally
> with Guile.  I have a great respect for Mark, but I must admit that
> I've been extremely disappointed to see him, on internal GNU lists,
> steadfastly defending what I consider indefensible behavior by RMS.

What you need to understand is to keep GNU project apolitical, where
only politics is free software philosophy.

That is how "community" is created, on sharing what is common to
community.

We are all different people. We have all our different political
notes.

RMS has affinity to Science Fiction. Somebody does not have affinity
on Science Fiction and cannot think of it.

Would then Science Fiction as subject beyond free software shall be
focused on to divide the community of free software depending on what
they think of science fiction? Please understand the analogy.

GNU community is friendly to each other and welcoming everybody
regardless of their outside political viewpoints.

Keep GNU community politics-free and it will keep growing and
remaining friendly.

If somebody is defending RMS or attacking RMS -- why not keep that in
your personal conversation to RMS, or keep it on your own blogs. But
keep it OUTSIDE OF GNU website.

> Upon seeing the mail to this list that Mark was stepping back into his
> co-maintainer role, I had assumed that Andy and Mark had worked
> through their differences and disagreements and was glad.  But now
> that I know that the truth is that RMS, as chief nuisance, put Mark
> back into this role without the consent of either active Guile
> co-maintainer, and without even telling them, I am extremely
> disappointed and I do not approve.

Could you deflate accusations please?

> RMS, once again, has abused his leadership role to make unilateral
> decisions to the detriment of a GNU project.

He has acted, he has not "abused". If anybody shall be leader and
contributor in GNU project those should be people loyal to free
software philosophy and loyal to GNU kind communication guidelines,
people who understand that GNU project is about free software
operating system and users' rights.

People who think that GNU project itself shall favor one or the other
political views are in the wrong place.

Please find appropriate place for your ranting, be it on RMS, myself,
or anybody else. Not in GNU.

GNU is welcoming community to everybody.

It is apolitical.

It is non-partisan community.

Could you try understanding?

It is not a democracy and it never was. Free software philosophy was
not invented by democratic process.

> Yet another data point that reinforces my belief that when RMS
> "leads" the results are negative.

That is inflation of rumors without facts. What can be wrong that one
developer was welcomed back? Nothing.

What can be wrong with people like Ludovic Courtès and Andy Wingo and
other members of the Thoughtpolice Squad? Everyting. They are dividing
community, they do not belong in kind community.

I let them be. But I propose that they take their disgraceful
behaviour outside of GNU.

> This is not the behavior of ap leader that I support, and I
> certainly don't personally recognize him as the leader of GNU.

So what?

> He truly is a broken stair, a stick in the mud, a roadblock.

He is the roadblock for people like you who never hold free software
speeches and who value rumor mongering and false journalism more than
his works to promote free software philosophy.

Otherwise, he is the driving force and with all his connections, and
influence that RMS has, he can fart and cause more good in society
then you can with your biased fact-less statements.

> What happens if we pay no mind to him?  Does the GNU brand mean
> anything at this point?  If anything, it's probably negative.

Blah blah blah, impossible, you have no idea what you are speaking
about. Numerous free software organizations exists in his world, all
over the planet, they do not share your thoughts, and your opinions
simply do not matter. You cannot change the "GNU brand".

It is project to build operating system and project is successful and
accomplished, and there are many free software distributions, and free
software philosophy is influencing the world and politics of many
countries. Users are gaining their rights back. And there is much more
to fight for.

You cannot do nothing about it.

You can hate RMS as much as you want, but you cannot do nothing about
it.

Finally there are people who love RMS for his way of living, for his
way of pushing ideology forward, you cannot do nothing about that.

> As for the future, I would like to see Guile continue to be the
> welcoming, inclusive, productive place it has been since I've known
> it, even though it may require some socially difficult decisions.
> Andy and Ludovic, you have my support.  You've responded to recent
> events admirably even though it meant being personally 

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Christopher Lemmer Webber 
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 11:33:11 -0400
> Cc: Andy Wingo 
> 
> I'm extremely saddened to see RMS pull this move.  It seriously
> undermines faith for maintainers of GNU projects that ther is any
> semblance of fair governance, and that the rug can't be pulled out from
> under their feet at any time.

To reach such conclusions, we'd need to hear a first-hand report of
what exactly did RMS and Mark say in their (presumed) off-list
exchange.  No such first-hand report was posted; Mark just said that
he decided to step back.

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Christopher Lemmer Webber]

I agree with everything Andy and David have written, so I'm not sure how
much to rehash here.

I'm extremely saddened to see RMS pull this move.  It seriously
undermines faith for maintainers of GNU projects that ther is any
semblance of fair governance, and that the rug can't be pulled out from
under their feet at any time.

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Thompson, David]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:14 AM Andy Wingo  wrote:
>
> Perhaps this moment is an opportunity, to see where the Guile community
> stands.  In that spirit I invite Guile community members to weigh in on
> the issue.  What do you think about Guile's continued relationship with
> GNU?  What about its relationship with RMS?  Finally, what would you
> like to see happen regarding the future of Guile?

A bit of context about myself and what has shaped my feelings on the
matter: In 2014 I was hired at the FSF as a web developer. In 2015 I
quit because the work environment that RMS is ultimately responsible
for was demotivating and sad.  All of my former FSF coworkers, some of
whom sincerely tried (and failed) to make positive change, have since
moved on due to similar frustrations.  In 2018 I disassociated myself
with GNU (as in I no longer identify as a GNU hacker, as there is no
formal association) after witnessing RMS rudely interrupt and derail
Bradley Kuhn's LibrePlanet session and insist that conference rules do
not apply to him.  That was the last straw for me, personally, but
this pressure had been building for years.

However, I have felt, and continue to feel, that Guile is an oasis in
the GNU desert and a large part of that is because it has maintainers
that truly care about creating a welcoming environment and not
tolerating bigotry in the name of "free speech."  Andy, Ludovic, and
Mark, I owe each of you much gratitude for all the help and positive
messages I've received since 2012 or so when I discovered Guile.  I
love free software, and I especially love Guile. Thank you, thank you,
thank you.

Now, onto the present.  Seeing Mark step down from as a Guile
co-maintainer was an indicator that something was amiss internally
with Guile.  I have a great respect for Mark, but I must admit that
I've been extremely disappointed to see him, on internal GNU lists,
steadfastly defending what I consider indefensible behavior by RMS.
Upon seeing the mail to this list that Mark was stepping back into his
co-maintainer role, I had assumed that Andy and Mark had worked
through their differences and disagreements and was glad.  But now
that I know that the truth is that RMS, as chief nuisance, put Mark
back into this role without the consent of either active Guile
co-maintainer, and without even telling them, I am extremely
disappointed and I do not approve.  RMS, once again, has abused his
leadership role to make unilateral decisions to the detriment of a GNU
project.  Yet another data point that reinforces my belief that when
RMS "leads" the results are negative.  This is not the behavior of a
leader that I support, and I certainly don't personally recognize him
as the leader of GNU.  He truly is a broken stair, a stick in the mud,
a roadblock.  What happens if we pay no mind to him?  Does the GNU
brand mean anything at this point?  If anything, it's probably
negative.

As for the future, I would like to see Guile continue to be the
welcoming, inclusive, productive place it has been since I've known
it, even though it may require some socially difficult decisions.
Andy and Ludovic, you have my support.  You've responded to recent
events admirably even though it meant being personally attacked by
others within GNU and outside.  Mark, I urge you to reconsider where
you stand with RMS.  I know that you have a lot of history, but times
have changed.

Regards,

- Dave