On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 10:39:50 +0200 Simon Tournier <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey, Just wanted to send a quick reply that as I have mentioned elsewhere I do not wish to see SWH go. I think they are doing great work. and as I mention in my first email I want to apply social pressure and make it clear to package authors what is happening so we can move to an opt-in model. It was never my intent to make it seem like we need to burn all bridges with SWH. I do think they have done mistakes but that is not a reason to break apart. We definetily need something like SWH and I do hope to see them come around to a consentual model. MSavoritias > Hi all, > > For the record, the Software Heritage initiative is supportive of the > Guix project since years. > > It means that members of Guix community have or had interactions with > Software Heritage (SWH) teams since years. For example, the blog post > “Connecting reproducible deployment to a long-term source code archive” > [1] published in 2019. And more recently, the scientific communication > “Source Code Archiving to the Rescue of Reproducible Deployment” [2]. > > Almost 6 years of friendly interactions and shared values. > > Could we avoid to express definitive opinions based on partial > considerations about multi-dimensional topics? > > Since years, several members of Guix community are helped in one way or > the other by SWH team members in improving free software ecosystem. > > Well, I speak for myself: I have been invited to several events > organized by SWH and it’s up to you to trust me when I say: SWH team > works very hard to embrace all the diversity of FOSS communities. For > example, I recently attended to a talk organized by SWH about Commons; > that talk had been a very good food for thought and maybe it could feed > our current discussion about governance/sociocracy via comments here or > there I could commit, I do not know, maybe. > > Well, I am very grateful for the opportunity to interact with SWH teams. > > For the record, SWH provided various supports for the organization of 10 > Years of Guix, back in 2022. Please remember that SWH team members were > there and some stayed all the three days; probably because we are a nice > community? All the video stream and good videos of the 10 Years of Guix > event you probably watched or maybe watch again is because the tireless > work of multi-hats person (Debian Developer, Debian Video Team, … and > working at SWH) helped by Guix community members. > > Please check the Copyright header for the subcommand “guix locate”. > Yes, it had been partly written by one SWH team member because, yes they > run Guix. Yes, their day-job is at SWH and they are also part of our > Guix community by contributing to Guix source code. > > Now, you take it as it is: I am sad by what people are concluding! > > Yes I understand why people are angry. Yes discussions must happen. > > However, I was expecting more benefit of the doubt considering history > and track record. Hum, even, maybe, I am asking myself if Guix > community is indeed nice or if this time the community is just harsh and > unfair. > > Do we forget the track record and the common history? > > Then, for what my opinion is worth, fighting against SWH while thinking > it’s fighting against LLM/AI is the wrong fight. Because 1. we are all > in the team. And 2. because SWH could be a facilitator for helping in > some regulations, maybe, I do not know. Somehow, I agree with Ekaitz. > > You take it as it is: I was expecting more humility by Guix community > members. Do you really think that a collective of people involved in > various FOSS communities with different roles, dedicating their free > time to free software or open source movements, do you think they are > the bad actors here? > > My humility tells me, as I expressed several times, nothing is ignored. > > Yes I also got the point about the lack of transparency. As I said > above, FWIW, I am in touch with SWH team. Well, I do not have special > information from SWH and I trust them to have listened or are still > listening various communities. So my understanding is: work is in > progress… Somehow, wait and see. > > Yes I know we cannot wait forever. Again, do we forget the track record > and the common history? Do we consider that a multi-layers topic > involving legal or ethics questions is straightforward to articulate? > > My humility tells me to wait to have clear and better understanding > about SWH motivations, their rationale, the measures and > counter-measures they maybe have in mind. Be patient and tolerant as I > am with my friends. > > Long enough email and thread. That’s all from me! :-) > > My last message. Not because I am bored but because one week of > holidays is starting now for me. ;-) > > 1: > https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2019/connecting-reproducible-deployment-to-a-long-term-source-code-archive/ > 2: https://hal.science/hal-04586520v1 > > Cheers, > simon
