2022 20:07, Christine Lemmer-Webber wrote:
> Okay. Now a longer reply. I am taking a substantial portion of my day
> to do this. I think there is a lot more going on here than even appears
> at the surface. So I have re-read everything that has been said so far
> and am doing my best t
gt;
> Normally I would have left this be quiet, or send an email one-on-one,
> when things reached this stage. But I tried to help this conversation
> end in quiet, and it hasn't happened, and it's been days. So I'm
> relaying my experiences here.
>
> Taylan Kammer writes:
>
Hi Guix,
I've just sent a patch (to guix-patches) that updates bytestructures to
version 2.0.1.
The bump in major version is due to a small API change:
The indexing semantics of bs:pointer would previously implicitly dereference
the pointer when any index other than '* was provided, whereas in
On 25.02.2022 21:38, Philip McGrath wrote:
>
> It seems to me that one of the reasons to have a CoC is to communicate that
> the identities and experiences of people who face discrimination are not up
> for debate. Yet here it seems they are, in fact, being called into question,
> [...]
>
On 25.02.2022 18:05, Maxime Devos wrote:
>
> A separate spin-off mailing list might address this (does not have to
> be on gnu.org or associated with guix per-se). It seems like Ricardo
> Wurmus wants any such list, if any, to be outside guix itself. Would
> you have an idea for the location?
>
On 25.02.2022 16:18, Blake Shaw wrote:
> zimoun writes:
>
> My position remains unchanged: our codes of conduct should do everything
> possible to be as inclusive as and open to peoples of marginalized
> groups that are discriminated against. White cis men shouldn't be in
> charge of deciding
On 25.02.2022 01:05, zimoun wrote:
>
> Any opposition?
>
Not from me for sure. The wording "sex characteristics" was added by the
author of the CoC as a response to my and others' suggestion to add "sex,"
and while I think it's a bad euphemism for just 'sex' (trying very hard to
shoehorn the
On 24.02.2022 14:21, Ekaitz Zarraga wrote:
>
>> I suspect you haven't properly read any of my mails and jumped to conclusions
>> based on a quick skim, or something like that.
>
> Well, I've been reading them and some people told you to stop and you still
> continue. People already told you were
On 23.02.2022 12:38, Blake Shaw wrote:
> Oliver Propst writes:
>
> [...] I would add that at this point, now that two women who
> are active in this community have come forward with reasonable requests
> to not accept the patch and politely asked us to "get back to hacking",
> yet the committer
On 21.02.2022 17:01, Christine Lemmer-Webber wrote:
> [...]
Hi, thanks for your input and for responding in a kind manner.
I didn't want to be that guy who instigates a political debate on a fringe
topic and annoys people on the ML, hence the panicked backpedaling...
But you've said a few
On 20.02.2022 22:02, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
>
> "Sex is distinct from gender" is a common transphobic talking point.
>
Like I said I don't actually want to argue, but I really feel the need
to point out that what you seem to consider a transphobic talking point
is seen as a fundamental
On 20.02.2022 22:37, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>
> Taylan Kammer writes:
>
>> Just one remark for them: most women I know would think twice before
>> spending time trying to get into a community whose rules intentionally
>> don't acknowledge sex-based discrimin
On 20.02.2022 19:05, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
>> Note: The upstream Contributor Covenant wouldn't want to include it
>> because the author seems to have a peculiar world-view where they
>> don't acknowledge that humans actually have a sex. I hope the Guix
>> maintainers are more reasonable
On 20.02.2022 14:16, Ekaitz Zarraga wrote:
> I have a weird question about this that might be a little bit offtopic.
>
> Why should we specify reasons? It's like we are saying some reasons are more
> important than others.
>
> Is it not ok with...
>
>> our project and our community a
On 20.02.2022 14:10, Julien Lepiller wrote:
> Sounds good, but isn't that included in "sexual identity" already? For
> reference, where does the author say that?
Apparently "sexual identity" is more like sexual orientation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_identity
--
Taylan
want to include it
because the author seems to have a peculiar world-view where they don't
acknowledge that humans actually have a sex. I hope the Guix maintainers
are more reasonable than that. :-)
--
TaylanFrom 3e7577ab3265ae61df7bb152d1bb843e375fa35b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Taylan Kammer
On 20.02.2022 13:37, Maxime Devos wrote:
>
> The points about slippery slopes, research and niche use-cases seem
> reasonable to me. I do see follow-up questions though, should the
> description in Guix warn about potential issues? And should the
> description focus on research uses? ...
>
>
On 20.02.2022 11:05, Maxime Devos wrote:
>
> Guix has a policy against including malware[citation needed 2], and
> furthering global warming[3] (and energy prices[4], if [3] is not bad
> enough for you) seems rather bad behaviour to me.
>
> Would these miners be considered malware in Guix?
>
On 31.12.2021 04:15, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> [...] Obviously, when
> travelling back in time, we want Guix' "1.2.3" to be whatever it was by
> that point, but on the other hand, we also want a recently pulled Guix
> to have a reasonably
On 04.09.2021 00:11, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
>
> Well, let #f or *unspecified* would also solve the git blame issue, [...]
>
Only partially on-topic but: I believe *unspecified* should not be used
explicitly in code. It's an implementation detail, and by avoiding it in
user code, we lessen
On 08.07.2021 23:52, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Commit da40d07066096a3b5a852041ea01fbb32240deda updates Zile, but this
> new version seems to have little in common with previous ones. In
> particular, it has more dependencies and a larger footprint:
>
> --8<---cut
On 17.05.2021 16:44, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:10:26PM +0200, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>> Hi Guix people,
>>
>> Just wanted to make sure everyone's aware, since we package Exim:
>>
>> https://blog.qualys.com/vulnerabilities-research/2021/05/04
Hi Guix people,
Just wanted to make sure everyone's aware, since we package Exim:
https://blog.qualys.com/vulnerabilities-research/2021/05/04/21nails-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-exim-mail-server
"Last fall, the Qualys Research Team engaged in a thorough code audit of Exim
and discovered 21
On 11.03.2021 20:16, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:15:19AM +0100, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>> Damn, sorry about that. I assumed of course that an improperly signed
>> commit would not be accepted, so I didn't pay any special mind.
>
> The security model is bas
On 11.03.2021 15:59, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> Taylan,
>
> So if I needed to send you encrypted mail, I'd have to possess all of
> your current GPG keys and encrypt to all of them? Thanks for the
> heads-up ;-) I'm not sure if that's how GPG is supposed to work (‘who
> does’, you say? fair
On 11.03.2021 08:37, Maxime Devos wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-03-11 at 00:15 +0100, Taylan Kammer wrote:
>> [...]
>> Damn, sorry about that. I assumed of course that an improperly signed
>> commit would not be accepted, so I didn't pay any special mind.
>>
>> However,
:55:39 2021 CET
> gpg: using RSA key 51A0982A58B64622464833085EEB3986CB2F65ED
> gpg: Good signature from "Taylan Kammer (Debian10VM)
> " [unknown]
> Primary key fingerprint: 51A0 982A 58B6 4622 4648 3308 5EEB 3986 CB2F 65ED
> Author: Taylan Kammer
>
> gnu: g
On 09.03.2021 12:38, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> Raghav Gururajan 写道：
>> Since, we already mention "todo list manager" in description, I think
>> "ti-cli" is better.
>
> It says nothing about the package and does not uniquely identify it:
>
> bundlerApp {
> pname = "t";
> [...]
>
>
On 24.01.2021 05:04, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
Now on Debian you should be able to:
apt install guix
guix install dpkg
guix environment --ad-hoc dpkg -- dpkg -i ./guix_1.2.0-3_amd64.deb
It is almost like symmetry!
That is... pretty awesome! :D
Thanks for this, I can see myself using
On 04.01.2021 16:38, raid5atemyhomework wrote:
Hi guix-developers,
I'd like to propose an idea for constructing `` objects.
[... snip ...]
What are your opinions? Blech? Yummy? Is it worth exploring this paradigm
for adding particularly complex features to an operating system definition?
On 22.12.2020 23:01, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Thoughts? :-)
My first thought: Neat, would love to see this implemented! :D
My second thought: it's surprising that IceCat supposedly changes so
much between releases. I suppose the reason is that this analysis is on
a per-file basis, and
An important question: do we have examples of packages for which we’d
like to have parameters? I’d grepped for “inherit” and that yields a
few potential candidates, but also maybe a few potential non-candidates.
Would this be a good fit for them?
I suppose Emacs would be an obvious candidate,
On 01.11.2020 22:53, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
Hi,
Lars-Dominik Braun skribis:
[…] from my point of view, the good direction would be a “web-app frontend”,
similarly to git-annex-assistant [1]. This design is more flexible because
it could be used locally *and* could also be the front-end of
On 01.11.2020 20:27, Arun Isaac wrote:
Hi Guix,
I am translating Guix to the Tamil language. Tamil doesn't yet have a
very standardized technical vocabulary, and I mostly coin terms on my
own. Most often, I construct calques of existing English words, and it
sounds alright. But, I'm having
On 30.10.2020 11:28, Brendan Tildesley wrote:
In the guix codebase, on many occasions there appear things like this:
(match-lambda
(($ agetty tty term baud-rate auto-login
login-program login-pause? eight-bits? no-reset? remote? flow-control?
host no-issue? init-string
On 26.10.2020 12:44, Pierre Neidhardt wrote:
zimoun writes:
For reference, Pierre started this [1] and I do not remember the end
of the story.
This is the end of the story ;)
https://ambrevar.xyz/guix-matters/index.html
But all these points are valid for Nix. For a Guix presentation to
On 26.10.2020 11:41, zimoun wrote:
The main pitfall is not the Dockerfile per se but the classical
distribution it often implies. Well, this video is explaining better
than my words. :-)
https://archive.fosdem.org/2019/schedule/event/gnu_guix_new_approach_to_software_distribution
Great
On 26.10.2020 10:29, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Taylan Kammer writes:
Hi Taylan,
Personally I'm a GNU-lover and a Scheme-lover so it's obvious why I
would choose Guix over Nix.
:-)
TL;DR: sell Guix (over Nix) to someone who doesn't care about GNU or
Scheme?
Have you seen Daniel Schaefer's
Hi Guixers,
Personally I'm a GNU-lover and a Scheme-lover so it's obvious why I
would choose Guix over Nix.
However, currently at my workplace I'm trying to pitch Nix/Guix as a
better way of generating Docker container images, opposed to the impure
Dockerfile way of doing it.
(I've never really
On 20.10.2020 16:26, zimoun wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 at 15:32, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
zimoun 写道：
Maybe it is on my part but it returns #t and not #true. So
somehow
you need to know that #t is also #true or fix the REPL to return
#true
and not #t.
Right. Making e.g.
On 12.10.2019 01:04, Jelle Licht wrote:
> Taylan Kammer writes:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> All other political conflicts should IMO be decided on a case by case
>> basis with the goal of reaching mutual compromise within the confines of
>> the communication chan
On 07.10.2019 16:32, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello Guix!
>
> We, a group of GNU maintainers sharing a vision for a stronger GNU
> Project, are publishing this statement today:
>
>https://guix.gnu.org/blog/2019/joint-statement-on-the-gnu-project/
>
> We are somewhat abusing the Guix blog
nee writes:
>> And by the way, an unpleasent off-topic issue:
>
> Hello, thank you for your considerate message. I'm using the my own
> domain for email in the future.
>
> Happy hacking!
Thank you for being understanding, happy hacking! :-)
- Taylan
nee wrote:
> Am 13.01.19 um 22:36 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
>>> 1) grub
>>> 2) linux's initrd
>>> 3) console
>>> 4) X/wayland's layout
>>> 5) How to do the above
>>
>
> Hello, I was working on this recently and made a patch for X11 that
> fixes the layout in the slim login and when you login into
s:
>
> > On 2018-12-25 20:49, Taylan Kammer wrote:
> >> Currently, after running 'guix pull', the Guix version will be reported
> >> by 'guix --version' as something like:
> >>
> >> 522d1b87bc88dd459ade51b1ee0545937da8d3b5
> >>
Currently, after running 'guix pull', the Guix version will be reported
by 'guix --version' as something like:
522d1b87bc88dd459ade51b1ee0545937da8d3b5
I think it would be really nice if instead it were something like:
2018-12-25-522d1b
where the date is the commit's date (year, month,
Clément Lassieur writes:
> Hi Taylan,
>
> You don't need to use the root account at all.
>
> Taylan Kammer writes:
>
>> Most desktop users have single unix account and are also in control of
>> root. These users might not want to differentiate between the c
Most desktop users have single unix account and are also in control of
root. These users might not want to differentiate between the current
guix version of root and their normal user. They might also not want
to differentiate between the packages available to root and the normal
user. As such
Pierre Neidhardt writes:
> - The name "Guix CI" tells developers what it is (continuous integration)
> while
> "Cuirass" does not. This is mostly true, however, for almost all
> applications
> (mpv, firefox, chromium, emacs, ).
Just an anecdote: I didn't know what Cuirass was until I
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Hello Taylan,
>
> Taylan Kammer skribis:
>
>> I'm quite out of the loop and would appreciate if someone told me where
>> to best push this if it's OK. :-)
>
> Heh, good to see you back!
Thank you. I'm afraid I won't be as a
Thoughts?
I'm quite out of the loop and would appreciate if someone told me where
to best push this if it's OK. :-)
>From 4742df4c050fdcfd6caa76baa2c191f5adaa2a30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Taylan Kammer
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 21:55:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] scripts: gc: Report size in M
51 matches
Mail list logo
