Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> writes: > Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prik...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Note that these steps are really not that different from moving Guix to >> Codeberg (you have to update %default-channel-url). Since users have >> to update either way, it's better to do both at once than just one at a >> time. > > For users running from a git checkout (or with their own soft fork), > move to Codeberg is one `git remote set-url' invocation, changing the > branch name involves adjusting all scripting that currently uses > origin/master. > > I think it is not fair to pretend that if done together with move to > Codeberg, it will be basically free.
Re-reading this after myself I think the tone is off. I did not mean to imply any ill intentions from your side. Sorry about that. I just think we need to be realistic about the impact of the change across whole ecosystem and evaluate whether it is worth it (given there are no technical advantages). Maybe a blog post stating that Guix does not support slavery would achieve the same goal of stating the position of the project, without having the technical cost associated? Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
