Hi Ryan, Perhaps Im being cynical but opening the doorway to lots of plug-and-play users atm could overwhelm the people heroically stabilising and smoothing out the OS.
Jonathan March 19, 2022 1:21 AM, "Ryan Prior" <rpr...@protonmail.com (mailto:rpr...@protonmail.com?to=%22Ryan%20Prior%22%20<rpr...@protonmail.com>)> wrote: One side-thread in "Building a software toolchain that works" notes that Guix faces challenges for adoption because it's not readily available to users of proprietary operating systems like macOS and Windows.I've witnessed over the past decade that GNU/Linux development on other platforms has become widespread, in large part due to the availability of the Docker for Desktop application which packages a lightweight, automagically managed GNU/Linux virtual machine running the Docker daemon with Docker client software built for the target platform.A user of Docker for Desktop on a proprietary OS can run "docker" commands which transparently execute commands inside a GNU/Linux container, making building and testing software quite convenient and reproducible without needing to set up cross-compile toolchains or spend time managing VM software.It makes absolute sense to me that Guix is not interested in building a native distribution for the Windows or macOS toolchains. One of Guix System's unique strengths is its adherence to the GNU FSDG and I don't think that's incompatible with making the Guix tools more generally available to end-user devs hacking on software using a proprietary OS.Technically, I think we could use a similar approach to the Docker for Desktop system: a "Guix for Desktop" installs software to create and manage a minimal Guix System virtual machine which automatically updates and reconfigures itself, requiring no manual administration by the end-user. And it would install a Guix client that connects to the Guix daemon running in the VM using a shared socket, enabling users to incorporate Guix transparently into their workflows.I think this would be a compromise for certain, the same way it is for Emacs and other GNU flagship projects that run on non-free systems. On the one hand, it serves to make those systems more valuable, which undermines our cause. But on the other hand it provides a major on-ramp to free software and superior build tooling, positively impacting the practical freedoms available to the end-users who adopt Guix.wdyt?
