Christine Lemmer-Webber <cweb...@dustycloud.org> writes: > That patches aren't being reviewed and aren't making it in. Alas.
We have ~45 authorized contributors. Based on the manner in which these contributors were added, I believe they have reasonable trustworthiness to uphold the goals of Guix. However, I do not believe that said level of trust is needed for _all_ changes. Specifically, the bulk of patch submissions in Guix deal with packages. Barring some core packages, perhaps Guix would be better served by splitting other packages into a separate channel. The organization and management of said channel could be optimized for tracking upstream as closely as possible. OpenSUSE's Factory model with OpenQA comes to mind [1]. #+begin_quote The core of Factory is divided into two rings (0-Bootstrap, 1-MinimalX). Ring 0 contains packages that form the most basic, minimalist system that can compile itself. On top of that Ring 1 adds what's in the default installation of the two primary Desktops. All other packages are not part of a ring. #+end_quote Orthogonally, the project would IMO also benefit by having automated testing to ensure that the combination of packages work well together. As things stand today, the incentives for those without commit access are such that it makes better sense for them to focus on their own channels. This is a shame. -- Suhail
