<zimoun>Although I push for broad Guix adoption, time to time, I have the same feeling about Guix. Hard to use in production… a regular Guix contributor must be around to make it work for simple cases; when it is not the case for Conda or regular distros. Arf.
<rekado>I think a lot of this comes down to a lack of actionable monitoring
<rekado>cuirass still isn’t quite good enough to tell us why something broke
<rekado>so we can’t easily ensure that packages build fine
<rekado>“it’s hard to know what is expected to work” is what I sometimes feel wen using Guix
<rekado>the “same shoulders” problem is odd. The discussion / rants about the state of KDE is just one step away from solving the problem: someone’s gotta take ownership of the problem and do something about it.
<zimoun>The issues I am talking are not new. Julien raises the issue on 2018, Mark on 2021 (for the most recent), civodul about release process on 2020, Björn on 2019, ng0 on 2017, etc. Many things in these threads are improving. But some issues are still visible because we are all using an equivalent to Debian unstable.
<civodul>re schedule, i think there are at least two problems: (1) having a person clearly identified as responsible, and (2) having a person committed
<civodul>someone who's hacking on the thing cannot be the timekeeper
<civodul>or it'll always be "let's make this one last change"
<rekado>in the past it always seemed to me that release activity was usually pretty “reactive”. The release went out and *then* the activity started, because only *then* people noticed that their packages were broken.
<drakonis>the point would be to have a way to accept changes and make them available to users without needing to go through staging or core-updates
<zimoun>Moreover, civodul I agree that « (1) having a person clearly identified as responsible, and (2) having a person committed » could a problem. I think it is important that a release manager (or a team) is clearly identified as such.
<drakonis>having packages and services moved down the channel tower as they're known to be usable as opposed to having to maintain a huge branch that overlays on top of another
<zimoun>drakonis: channels and branches are the same thing from a “guix pull” point of view.
<drakonis>yes, but i mean the organization of such