<rekado>or maybe we need an older variant of openblas
<zimoun>rekado: I have thought again about master/staging/core-updates and your argument sayings up-front vs side effects. I agree that the side effects are reducing etc. But we have a human bias: loose aversion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion Therefore one unique failure is more visible than 20k+ perfectly working packages. The weight of side effects is higher than fpr up front, IMHO.
<PurpleSym>As for that “people with commit access are expected to review patches”: Institutional developers may not have the freedom to use their time for that.
<zimoun>PurpleSym, I agree. But since there is Sign-Off, it is possible to report that activity, IMHO. As civodul said elsewhere, and I agree, it is also important to provide the message to our institutes that scientists cannot be just freeriders. Well, the message is difficult and I agree some “bosses“ do not let such freedom. Bah difficult topic. :-)
<rekado>one thing that doesn’t come up often enough, I think, is that the increase in packages also dramatically increased the amount of maintenance.
<rekado>yes, review is important, but we also have a lot of existing stuff that doesn’t stay fresh on its own
<zimoun>Yeah, I am just pointing how other are trying to fix similar issues.
<rekado>zimoun: you wanted URL redirection for message ids, right?
<rekado>this seems easy enough, so I’ll hack on it next when I manage to carve out some time.
<zimoun>yeah, I think it could be nice to have. But as for many things, I am often too lazy to jump in give a try.
<rekado>one thing that’s a bit depressing about issues.guix.gnu.org is that ‘forgotten issues’ looks pretty static
<rekado>and when I look inside it’s mostly stalled discussion that cannot easily be moved forward.
<PurpleSym>zimoun: I’m not sure how detailed I’m allowed to get, but visibility has no value if the team (which is one person, usually) is stuck in maintenance work and cannot move the product forward.
<PurpleSym>Because that’s what they are paid for and not maintenance of Guix – even in science.
<zimoun>rekado: I am doing my best for unstalling. But I really feel alone. I have never did stats but I guess only apteryx and me are digging old issues and try to close.
<PurpleSym>We desperately need automation of everything that can be automated, because we, the humans, cannot keep up any more. And imo that also means using existing automation approaches and not spending more time inventing new ones.
<zimoun>PurpleSym: I am not sure to understand your words about Instution.
<zimoun>To me, there is no free lunch and everything has a cost. The question is how to collectively (public money, public code) share this cost.
<zimoun> As I am explaining to my colleagues, CRAN or Biocondcutor are not automagically working; people are investing ressources. It saves some of my own Institute ressources, what my Institute is giving back? The answer is more than often: nothing and so? Ask about the maintenance of the commons in the picture of the scientific activities is something difficult for sure, but asking is free. ;-)