Ian Eure <i...@retrospec.tv> writes: > Guix seems committed to using an email-based workflow, so I think it > makes a lot of sense to look at how Linux does it. It’s the most > successful project in the world to use email-based development.
I believe, perhaps, the biggest issue with Guix is a diffusion of responsiblity. It's not clear who is responsible for what action. Who is responsible, for instance, for the next version of Guix? And if it's not the tagged releases that are driving development, is there common awareness in the community as to what is? What, for instance, is the target merge windows for some of the -team branches? Given a patch, is it always clear who the applicable "subsystem maintainer" is? In some cases it's clear that there is a corresponding "team", but at times there's more than one person and at other times there's no corresponding team. I believe there are a few lessons to be learned from here: <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/2.Process.html#> -- Suhail
