NixOS’ influence and importance at pushing Linux forward into the (previously) unexplored landscape of configuring your complete system through a single config file is undeniable. It’s been a wild ride, but it was well worth it.

And although it has only been relatively recently that it has lost its niche status, the recent influx of so-called ‘immutable’ distros springing up like mushrooms is undeniably linked to and inspired by NixOS.

However, unfortunately, while this should have been very exciting times for what’s yet to come, the recent drama surrounding the project has definitely tarnished how the project is perceived.

NixOS’ ideas will definitely live on regardless. But how do you envision NixOS’ own future? Any ETA’s for when this drama will end? Which lessons have we learned (so far) from this drama? Are there any winners as a result of this drama? Could something like this happen to any distro?


In case you’re out of the loop. Though, there’s a lot that has transpired since but which hasn’t been rigorously documented at a single place; like how 4 out of 5 NixOS board members have quit over the last 2 months or so.

  • refalo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    When I see posts like this and suggest keeping politics out of technical communities, my comment just gets removed by the mods for “transphobia”. I can’t even wrap my head around that one…

    Other (multiple) times I’ve had different people respond with “a person’s right to exist is not a political issue, it’s a human rights issue”… as if I was ever talking about anyone’s right to exist.

    Then I get the people who say that it’s impossible to not have politics in a community, as eventually someone will come along and do things like the SerenityOS drive-by PR and now any action or inaction by the owner that doesn’t fit their narrative is labeled as some kind of personal attack against them and they call on their friends to go full-on SJW war against the project because someone had an opinion they don’t like.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      For you to understand: when you say “keep politics out of tech” that is an explicit political position and you are basically saying “politics for me, but not for you”. Or to put it in different terms: unspoken support for the status quo, is a deeply reactionary political position and you are trying to enforce this by “keeping politics out of tech”.

      • refalo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I disagree. But I think the overall intention with saying that is simply that we/I don’t want to have that discussion or it’s off-topic/not the right place. I guess that could be said instead although I doubt it would really make much difference. People will still find a way to complain and boycott even if you do nothing i.e. “silence is violence”.

        I think a lot of people will simply stay away from your project if you invite that kind of discussion, regardless of who is right or wrong. More people than might otherwise be attracted by arguably more explicit and inclusive stances.