Hi Ludo, Thanks for the recall. I thinks it is worth having a later and careful reading on the proposal before the end of this period, considering its relevance. A few remarks (disclaimer: low profile contributor, here).
First and most important, to me what really matters here is making life easy to reviewers, committers and infrastructure maintainers. Contributors will most probably find their way, no matter what interface we use. To be honest, I don’t feel like Guix suffers from attracting contributors (see https://debbugs.gnu.org/rrd/guix-patches.html), but rather from keeping them motivated. I noticed that the service I personally use the most, yhetil.org (public-inbox instance) for navigating issues, bugs, patches and mail lists, is not even mentioned in the GCD. Then, latest improvements (since the writing of this GCD) to mumi (thanks !) greatly simplify locating relevant information, both using issues web and cli. Finally, the whole proposal may be understood as a delegation on Codeberg e.V. capabilities, which makes Guix dependent on a third party. This might reveal with time as a good or a bad idea, only future can tell. Assuming there are no significant issues from their side, I’m curious about how Guix as a whole would handle a significant raise on contributions (see graphs above). Which brings to my previous first and most important statement. All the best, C.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
