On 01/30/2018 at 02:03 Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Hi Malcolm, > >> Sorry for the MisCaPITaliZAtion > > No WoRRieS! It seems to be very common :) > >> Sorry if I lost the flow of the discussion. I entirely trust your >> understanding of the focus of the discussion. > > No, your comments were spot on and very helpful. I’m just trying to > understand if your suggestions would better fit in some sort of unified > description for both GuixSD and Guix (as George proposed) or if it were > clearer if we treated GuixSD as a special case (“A system derived from > the extension of Guix features to the bare-metal/GNU+Linux distribution > level”).
ISTM Malcom's comments apply equally well to Guix and Guix+GuixSD when a sysops manager is involved in the deployment decision. If they have an installed base on another distro, Guix will be deployed first and GuixSD may never be deployed. OTOH, a forward thinking sysops setting up new systems in a startup might deploy only GuixSD ;-) This possibility is a reason to include GuixSD as part of a unified presentation to sysops targets. Malcom's comments don't apply to users that are owners of dedicated desktop/laptop hardware. Other Distros address such "desktop" users by a) ignoring them, b) treating them like sub project (debian), c) targeting them with separate server and desktop installs (Ubuntu), or d) providing only a desktop solution (mint). ISTM we have the same options. At the moment we are somewhere between a) and b). We could easily move to b) or c). Moving to d) would be a big step: we would probably need to develop a "desktop variant" of GuixSD, re-brand it, and market it separately to compete effectively against distros targeting only desktop users. WDYT? - George
