I’m glad to hear more from the Foundation these days, and I think this kind of effort to recognize and structure the different groups that make this community work is especially important.
I’d like to know the motivation for choosing these specific teams and why they are deemed critical or formal. Looking at what constitutes a critical team, I find that it very much focuses on development (plans and roadmaps). One common critique is that this emphasis on the development of new features causes stability problems.
From my point of view, to find the most critical teams we should look at what is needed to maintain first and foremost the status quo. The core of Nix(OS) is the package manager along with the Nix expressions that are most commonly used. We want to test these hence we need to build them for which we need the infra and the funding. Thus to simply maintain the status quo I’d argue we have here four critical teams:
- Nix team
- Core packages (mass rebuilds, this includes security, as well as NixOS)
- Infra team
- Foundation for allocating/ensuring funding of the infra
I think we can all reason a bit differently here and end up with different results, hence why I am curious to the Boards reasoning.