Re: Idea for packaging rust apps

2024-05-22 Thread MSavoritias
-experiments I was wondering of the differences since your build system seems to still be using cargo under the hood instead of rustc. MSavoritias

Re: the right to rewrite history to rectify the past (was Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive)

2024-03-21 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/21/24 17:23, Hartmut Goebel wrote: Am 21.03.24 um 07:12 schrieb MSavoritias: Specifically the social rules that we support trans people and we want to include them. Any person really that want to change their name at some point for some reason. Interestingly you are asking the right

Re: the right to rewrite history to rectify the past (was Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive)

2024-03-21 Thread MSavoritias
b/-/issues/20960 for Gitlab doing the same thing. MSavoritias As a side note, other than the "petname system" please also consider re:claimID from GNUnet: https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/index.html https://www.gnunet.org/en/reclaim/motivation.html [...] Regards, Giovanni. [1]

Re: the right to rewrite history to rectify the past (was Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive)

2024-03-21 Thread MSavoritias
and making them feel safe and respected. MSavoritias Also, SHW and other organizations (re)distributing free software have their rights and should excercise them without being harassed. Ludovic Courtès writes: [...]

Re: Guix role in a free society

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
ple are above any tech ideals we may have. We dont need to rewrite history at all also. There was a solution already by Gitlab which was also proposed in the other thread (for legal reasons) to do with UUIDs. MSavoritias

Re: rewriting history; Was: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/18/24 17:14, Andreas Enge wrote: Am Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 04:33:49PM +0200 schrieb MSavoritias: Actually gitlab already is facing something like that and they are doing what was proposed elsewhere: mapping of UUIDs to display names https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/20960

Re: rewriting history; Was: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/18/24 16:19, Andreas Enge wrote: Am Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 04:03:20PM +0200 schrieb MSavoritias: Rewriting history is the wrong question imo. I dont think a request to change all of the history of Guix will be accepted anyway. A much easier thing to do is to change the approach

Re: rewriting history; Was: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
Andreas Rewriting history is the wrong question imo. I dont think a request to change all of the history of Guix will be accepted anyway. A much easier thing to do is to change the approach in the future. And let all the past history untouched. MSavoritias

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/18/24 15:12, Simon Tournier wrote: Hi MSavoritias, On lun., 18 mars 2024 at 13:47, MSavoritias wrote: As advice for the future when somebody says a concern or wish they have, your first statement shouldn't be "but its legal" because that completely dismisses any co

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
ze their mistake. MSavoritias

Re: rewriting history; Was: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-18 Thread MSavoritias
on. Guix is a place that supports trans people and anybody else that wants to change their name. We don't need "enforcers" here or put the "burden of proof" on people. MSavoritias

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-17 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/17/24 18:20, Ian Eure wrote: MSavoritias writes: On 3/17/24 11:39, Lars-Dominik Braun wrote: Hey, I have heard folks in the Guix maintenance sphere claim that we never rewrite git history in Guix, as a matter of policy. I believe we should revisit that policy (is it actually

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-17 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/17/24 13:53, paul wrote: Hi all , thank you MSavoritias for bringing up points that many of us share. It's clearly a tradeoff what to do about the past. For the future, as Christpher already stated, we need a serious solution that we can uphold as a free software project that does

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-17 Thread MSavoritias
not trying to say what we should do about commit history rewriting here. Personally the tradeoffs are probably worth it. But I am trying to say what Guix should do as a culture over including people or excluding in the case of Software Heritage. MSavoritias

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-17 Thread MSavoritias
On 3/16/24 21:45, Tomas Volf wrote: On 2024-03-16 20:24:50 +0200, MSavoritias wrote: I was also distressed to see how poorly they treated a developer who wished to update their name: https://cohost.org/arborelia/post/4968198-the-software-heritag https://cohost.org/arborelia/post/5052044

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-16 Thread MSavoritias
Heritage, but there should be some social action we can take. For example until the matter is resolved and Software Heritage implements a process that respects trans rights Software Heritage should not be welcome in Guix Spaces. MSavoritias

Re: Concerns/questions around Software Heritage Archive

2024-03-16 Thread MSavoritias
to know to never touch whatever they are doing. MSavoritias

Re: RFI: Guix XMPP service.

2023-12-10 Thread MSavoritias
On 12/10/23 17:56, Vivien Kraus wrote: Le dimanche 10 décembre 2023 à 17:45 +0200, MSavoritias a écrit : There is also a trust issue. For acceptance, we need bridging. For bridging, we need policing. And for policing, we need people with time. That's a good question yeah. Whether we want

Re: RFI: Guix XMPP service.

2023-12-10 Thread MSavoritias
On 12/10/23 16:43, Felix Lechner wrote: Hi MSavoritias, On Sun, Dec 10 2023, MSavoritias wrote: Do you think it would be ok to use a VPS? Or do we want a physical server at somebody's home? It's a community question. Everyone knows about IRC, and it works well. I'm not sure there is a &qu

Re: RFI: Guix XMPP service.

2023-12-09 Thread MSavoritias
On 12/10/23 05:53, Felix Lechner wrote: Hi, On Fri, Dec 08 2023, MSavoritias wrote: 2. We can self host our own prosody instance. I host my own Prosody instance (mostly to talk to Soprani). [1][2] I recommend the project host its own, as well. Yeah the consensus so far seems

Re: RFI: Guix XMPP service.

2023-12-08 Thread MSavoritias
On 12/8/23 20:43, Vivien Kraus wrote: Hello Guix! Le vendredi 08 décembre 2023 à 19:22 +0200, MSavoritias a écrit : I propose to host an xmpp instance with a room/or some rooms under the guix domain. Something like xmpp.guix.gnu.org Are there options for guests? I don’t know how XMPP

RFI: Guix XMPP service.

2023-12-08 Thread MSavoritias
a problem. All we would need to do is change where our DNS points to and that's it. MSavoritias

Re: Add xmpp room to the list of group chats.

2023-12-07 Thread MSavoritias
On 12/7/23 09:42, Ada Stevenson wrote: Hi, On 12/2/23 8:20 AM, MSavoritias wrote: Hey, I thought this mailing list is the most fitting for the request feel free to point out if its better somewhere else. Is the community open to have group chats listed in other networks than IRC assuming

Add xmpp room to the list of group chats.

2023-12-02 Thread MSavoritias
mpp is free software from server to client. Also disclaimer: I am not talking about starting to bridge them. That is an entirely separate thing with different tradeoffs and maintenance. Just listing the group chat is easy though :) Msavoritias

Re: The e(macs)lephant in the room and the Guix Bang

2023-09-25 Thread MSavoritias
at happens with Emacs. This is from someone who uses Emacs. MSavoritias

Re: The Giraffe; the Pelican et al (was Re: The e(macs)lephant in the room and the Guix Bang)

2023-09-25 Thread MSavoritias
guile or guix need to first contribute docs is pretty ridiculous. MSavoritias On 23-09-2023 10:58, paul wrote: Dear Janneke, On 9/23/23 09:37, Janneke Nieuwenhuizen wrote: Nathan Dehnel writes: I don't use emacs either (because it's so impenetrable) Emacs might be somewhat different from

Re: The e(macs)lephant in the room and the Guix Bang

2023-09-25 Thread MSavoritias
in changing anything for decades in the default config also doesn't help. MSavoritias

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-22 Thread MSavoritias
ke the web approach. And accommodate them so we can have guix used by more people. Simple as that :D Its free software and power to the person that using the software after all. MSavoritias

Re: The e(macs)lephant in the room and the Guix Bang

2023-09-20 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/20/23 17:03, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: MSavoritias writes: On 9/20/23 11:45, Nguyễn Gia Phong via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution. wrote: On 2023-09-20 at 10:21+02:00, Csepp wrote: It's better if we have at least one *well documented* developer setup, than if we

Re: The e(macs)lephant in the room and the Guix Bang

2023-09-20 Thread MSavoritias
it more. MSavoritias

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-18 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/18/23 20:13, Simon Tournier wrote: On Mon, 18 Sept 2023 at 18:35, MSavoritias wrote: I was talking from my experience. If you don't share it that is fine. Share what? Your experience? How can I? Instead, I share facts backed by numbers. It is fine to share how you perceive

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-18 Thread MSavoritias
with guix or guile. MSavoritias

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-18 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/18/23 12:37, Simon Tournier wrote: Hi, On Sun, 17 Sep 2023 at 19:20, MSavoritias wrote: Including an committer. And the fact that guix doesn't get have many committers and contributors are scarce, speaks for itself. If you don't see it I suggest asking people in social networks/forums

Re: Thank you for using Emacs

2023-09-18 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/18/23 16:10, Peter Polidoro wrote: MSavoritias writes: I go to the manual to learn package management, https://guix.gnu.org/en/manual/devel/en/guix.html#Package-Management Apparently i have to either use the terminal or something called emacs. If I follow the guide located here

Re: Guix Survey (follow up on "How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?")

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
with this. MSavoritias On 9/16/23 15:59, Wilko Meyer wrote: Hi Guix, I haven't had enough time to read up on every topic that has been mentioned in the "How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?" discussion as at some point it got quite a lot to follow. At o

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/10/23 01:20, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote: Am Samstag, dem 09.09.2023 um 21:40 +0200 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus: Liliana Marie Prikler writes: Must we force a single workflow on everyone, even if our track record in reviewing and merging doesn’t clearly show that our way is superior?

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
than anything email. as a medium. I mean we don't even have much accessibility to speak of in guix but that's another topic. MSavoritias

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/12/23 17:51, Maxim Cournoyer wrote: Hi, Csepp writes: Giovanni Biscuolo writes: [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] Hello Csepp, Csepp writes: [...] I don't think repeating that no forge sucks less advances the conversation towards any solution other than keeping the status quo,

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
As there is for actually committing being discussed elsewhere for improvements. Yes I want to help on all of them at some point :) MSavoritias

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
On 9/7/23 23:38, Katherine Cox-Buday wrote: On 9/5/23 2:43 PM, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote: Am Dienstag, dem 05.09.2023 um 19:40 +0100 schrieb (: Liliana Marie Prikler writes: Uhm, we have snippets? Well, those are exclusive to Emacs :)  And without regard to /that/ issue, I do think

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-17 Thread MSavoritias
a person that wants to contribute will get the argument. The part about email working for you, I am glad it does :) We need to care for the people that may like a different style of contributing too though. Because the more people guix can attract the better for the project. MSavoritias

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-13 Thread MSavoritias
anges are still just `git push`). >>   13. Go to forge website, click button to open a pull-request. >>   14. Wait for CI to tell you if anything is wrong. > > To be fair, here you forget one important blocker: having an account to > the forge website. > > I do n

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-13 Thread MSavoritias
s possible since its a horrible interface. And yes the gnu commit messages could be improved. Its not like they are set in stone anyway. MSavoritias Giovanni Biscuolo writes: > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > Hello Katherine, > > thank you for having summarized (part of) this thread in a li

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-13 Thread MSavoritias
Simon Tournier writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 at 12:53, MSavoritias wrote: > >> Do you know if there are any plans to write a scheme bug/patching >> system? Because looking a bit into it, it doesn't seem like its that >> actively developed so maybe we

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-09-13 Thread MSavoritias
Ekaitz Zarraga writes: >> > This is what I mean when I say many times emacs is kind of mandatory, >> > and >> > this thread is kind of a demonstration of what I meant because the main >> > discussion evolved to: you can use this or that in emacs to ease the >> > dev >> > experience. >> >> >>

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-08-30 Thread MSavoritias
it as easy as that but I also need to clone a repo and run multiple scripts inside a container(?). We should work on moving as close to a 'guix edit' and 'mumi push' contribution as possible. MSavoritias Katherine Cox-Buday writes: > Summary of my conclusions: > > 1. We should use

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-08-29 Thread MSavoritias
ons > is an argument that kills all the forges, sadly :) > With Sourcehut you can contribute without an account. There is also https://forgefed.org/ which is for federated forges using activitypub. So you can have one account for all forges that federate. :D MSavoritias >> > > at the ChatGP

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-08-29 Thread MSavoritias
like its that actively developed so maybe we would be better served by one in scheme. Or Sourcehut of course as somebody wrote in another email. Since not much would change with sr.ht anyways. MSavoritias > Cheers, > simon

Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?

2023-08-29 Thread MSavoritias
east misery leads you to > plain email. > Also this is sounds like you think the other person just follows fashion and you are the one that follows the "enlightened" way because you use email. This is not the discussion we are having and we don't treat people as less if they dont use terminal, emails or emacs or whatever else you find amazing or whatever. MSavoritias > Cheers

Re: Relaxing the restrictions for store item names

2023-08-24 Thread MSavoritias
Julien Lepiller writes: > Le 24 août 2023 10:41:23 GMT+02:00, Msavoritias a > écrit : >> >>What I am saying here is that: >>Its easy to see from our very US centric tech culture why everybody >>should just use ASCII because "This is how it is". B

Re: Relaxing the restrictions for store item names

2023-08-24 Thread Msavoritias
tools like Unicode that make our lives easier compared to US or nothing of 30-40 years ago. Just imagine how many good programmers we are missing because they don't want/can't learn English or don't have an ASCII keyboard. MSavoritias MSavoritias writes: > Nguyễn Gia Phong writes: >

Re: Relaxing the restrictions for store item names

2023-08-24 Thread MSavoritias
Nguyễn Gia Phong writes: > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > On 2023-08-24 at 10:41+03:00, MSavoritias wrote: >> Nguyễn Gia Phong writes: >> > I think the distinction must be made here between Guix and GuixSD. >> > >> > The packaging so

Re: Relaxing the restrictions for store item names

2023-08-24 Thread MSavoritias
Nguyễn Gia Phong writes: > On 2023-08-24 at 10:16+03:00, MSavoritias wrote: >> "(" writes: >> > Eidvilas Markevičius writes: >> > > with a name that contains non-Latin characters in it >> > > (e.g., "Naršytuvas" by Rašti

Re: Relaxing the restrictions for store item names

2023-08-24 Thread MSavoritias
of course). We should open a bug report and work on fixing the bug. MSavoritias "(" writes: > Eidvilas Markevičius writes: >> with a name that contains non-Latin characters in it (e.g., >> "Naršytuvas" by Raštija [2]). > > I think we should stick to ASCI

Re: A Forum for Guix Users

2023-07-15 Thread MSavoritias
requests and such. Thats why I was also aggreeing with Sourcehut in the other email. (Which already has guix ci support.) Guix would benefit from less NIH imo. At least in places where there already better solutions. Msavoritias > -- > • attila lendvai > • PGP: 963F 5D5F 45C7 DFCD 0A39

Re: A Forum for Guix Users

2023-07-15 Thread Msavoritias
ed with Sourcehut as a much better frontend for guix. Plus its AGPL3 licensed all of it afaik. Regarding the forum I dont think any forum would have much traction. I agree that either matrix or xmpp could be considered instead for that purpose. As a more approachable chat mechanism compared to IRC. MSav

Re: Maybe a way to get a few more developpers to work on Guix ?

2023-06-25 Thread MSavoritias
reasonable. > > In other words, I don't think a LLM could make it easier/faster to write > package definitions. > > Kind regards, > pinoaffe Yeah Agreed. It seems to just shift the problem from "We need developers" to "We need people that verify the output of the LLM." So we are basically stuck with the same problem. Regards, MSavoritias