Re-releasing an open letter to a wider audience is impossible, as we’ve seen. Good faith is difficult in that situation.
1 Like
I don’t think you need to understand, perhaps. I think it was a silly thing for me to do. I do appreciate your reply though. It helps me evaluate my notions, and move forward. Maybe I felt that way I because most of the Nix community I interacted with displayed many of my same values. This was a mistake in this lens. I don’t regret the interactions I have, even now.
Thank you.
1 Like
I don’t need to, but I’d like to. I want to.
I was not trying to cause shame or even change your mind. In fact, you are clearly not even close to the only one who felt this way. I just want to understand something that I do not. I do appreciate your answer and it takes a lot to be that honest with yourself, let alone others.
You’re talking about moral injury and the whole thing seems to hinge on the difference between “sponsorship” and “entity who donates.” From what I can glean, the sponsorship causes moral injury, but taking donations from the same entity does not. I can’t make sense of this.
If it were “get rid of all MIC, we don’t want their donations, we don’t want them to sponsor docs work, and we don’t want them to sponsor events,” I can understand that.
4 Likes
edit: I shouldn’t write that here, sorry.
Quick reminder that this is not another thread about the Anduril-sponsorship situation itself, but about the aux.computer initiative presented by OP.
12 Likes
I’m looking to understand their political stance before deciding to switch.
Will aux.computer permit Anduril to sponsor their future conferences? Will they ban individuals like Jonathan Ringer from participating? Will there be a seat for gender minorities?
1 Like
If you’re going to troll, can you at least try a little bit harder?
14 Likes
Will Anduril sponsorship be allowed?
No
Will jonringer be allowed?
No
Will there be a seat for minorities?
Positions will be democratically elected, unlike the NixOS Foundation. Ideally this helps resolve problems with representation as a whole.
21 Likes
To clarify here some things here.
Jon has done a lot of work for Nix. His videos on packaging things are helpful for a lot of people, myself included. His actions would violate the project’s code of conduct and so action would be taken. But, realistically, Jon likely does not want to move to a Nix fork. I think he would much prefer to keep building what he already has.
12 Likes
I think this is wonderful and I can’t wait to join.
Now, I’m not sure whether this is just a detail of wording or an important issue, but: I wouldn’t call this a fork until it has its own infrastructure.
5 Likes
I think it’s good that you found a constructive way to move forward.
Maybe it will help over time to keep compatibility with the Nix that is produced by this community (as much as you can anyway) so that you can leverage nixpkgs? There haven’t really been many forks of nix so it will be interesting to see what emerges from this one over time.
2 Likes
Thank you for clarifying the political stance of the fork!
It seems this project’s community may not be considered friendly by the majority here.
2 Likes
Hm? The majority?
Can you expand on why you think the majority will not consider this friendly?
10 Likes
Probably not to the people who would rather stay with Nix. Which is why the fork is happening, reconciling the two doesn’t seem possible at the moment.
2 Likes
I get it, but we don’t need to argue here. @wombat is thinking that most of the people who use or contribute to nix are against the banning of these things. You’re not going to change their mind at this point. It’s best to drop it for now.
7 Likes
Be mindful that many would prefer the continuity of staying with Nix and the NixOS project’s community, and the way you frame it, I feel you think only “the bad ones” would. I’m not sure it’s good optics. Though I might be reading too much in “the people who would rather stay”.
15 Likes
You make a good point, my previous message was worded poorly. I suppose what I meant is that there are people staunchly against the kinds of values mentioned in the linked site. Those people are who I am referring to. I understand that there are plenty of people who do not fall into that group and would also like for the nix community to remain whole.
9 Likes
My reasoning for saying so is mostly just a “let them have this one” mindset. We’ve tried arguing for weeks, it got us nowhere. I would rather we focus on making something better now.
4 Likes
Will there be a constitution à la Debian? Will there be anything to prevent a team from deciding they, e.g., only care about supporting Linux? Once a team makes a decision, would second-guessing or relitigating it be prohibited?
4 Likes
SIGs will be established with a charter that defines their role, requirements, members, responsibilities, etc. That charter must be accepted by the steering committee to create the SIG. Once created, SIGs are permanent unless explicitly dissolved by the steering committee or no members remain to chair it (and no special elections are able to elect a new set of members).
If a SIG wants to modify its charter, the change must be approved by the steering committee.
8 Likes