Hi Leo, Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 04:39:34PM +0100, Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote: >> If we look at big projects like Linux, they have faced a similar issue >> in the past and as I understand they solved it by using more adapted >> tools and processes and they even ended up making their own software >> tools (git, checkpatch.pl, etc) for the critical parts, and as I >> understand there are also organizational flexibility (different >> subsystems have different ways of working), and subsystems have their >> own mailing list and so on, but they also kept the mailing list >> model precisely because it scales well. > > Overall nice email with a lot of well-considered points! > > One thing about how Linux solved these issues, is that it Linux became > commercially valuable to the point where they pay people to maintain the > code, which includes reviewing contributions. And still you can find > endless complaints about their onerous contribution workflow. Of course, > Linux has made many concessions to pragmatism, which had some effect on > its commercial value. Guix is less concessionary so we will struggle to > find funding on a proportional scale, in my opinion. Which many concessions to pragmatism are you referring to? The only one I can think of is allowing devices to load their non-free firmwares, but I'm not even sure this was a concession, more of a 'I don't care what code runs outside of the kernel' position of Linus that I doubt has changed throughout the years. Perhaps sticking to GPLv2 *only* could be thought of another concession, as it doesn't defend against Tivoization the way GPLv3 does. -- Thanks, Maxim
