From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.3 (2019-12-06) on atuin.qyliss.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.3 Received: by atuin.qyliss.net (Postfix, from userid 496) id 8FAED8A28; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 02:00:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by atuin.qyliss.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE5E78A1A; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 02:00:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by atuin.qyliss.net (Postfix, from userid 496) id D252389EB; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 01:59:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by atuin.qyliss.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E9D89E9 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 01:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Comparison to Qubes OS From: =?utf-8?q?infokiller_=E2=80=8B?= To: discuss@spectrum-os.org Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 01:59:57 -0000 Message-ID: <159218639703.15924.2210454595783448015@localhost> In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: HyperKitty on https://spectrum-os.org/ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID-Hash: R6O2PC4XKXG2HNC35NX7LETSYH3CUU6G X-Message-ID-Hash: R6O2PC4XKXG2HNC35NX7LETSYH3CUU6G X-MailFrom: joweill@icloud.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-config-1; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.1 Precedence: list List-Id: General high-level discussion about Spectrum Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Micha=C5=82 "rysiek" Wo=C5=BAniak wrote: > On 6/14/20 9:27 PM, Alyssa Ross wrote: > > So, why not > > start a public discussion in Qubes' mailing list on issue > > tracker to figure out what is needed to accomplish Spectrum's goals? > >=20 > > It will probably turn out that you made the right decision by starti= ng > > a separate project, but at the very least: > > - You'll may get attention from people who can contribute to Spectru= m > > - The issues involved with be publicly documented and searchable for > > future generations =20 > > I think you maybe don't appreciate just how huge an undertaking this > > would be. There is so much that would have to change about how Qube= s > > works that I think you'd end up having to reimplement most of it > > anyway, but you'd be doing it bit by bit, never having the opportuni= ty > > to consider the system as a whole.=20 > Plus, SpectrumOS does not have to deal with backwards compatibility. If= QubesOS > developers were to start implementing these changes, they would constan= tly have > to deal with trade-offs between ease of implementing them and the cost = of > breaking backwards compatibility. Well, that's what major version changes are for. Qubes 5 could change to = a Nix model if they wanted without worrying much about backwards compatib= ility. I assume that won't happen for other reasons, like having higher p= riority work, and lack of experience with Nix. >=20 > > At the end of the day I just don't believe that > > trying to shoehorn these > > changes into Qubes is the best way to make progress. It might well = be > > valuable to try that, but even so it would make much more sense for > > somebody who believes in that approach to dedicate the huge amount o= f > > effort required to attempt it, rather than me. This could be anothe= r > > effort that could be pursued in parallel to my work on Spectrum.=20 > Very much this. >=20 > -- > Best, > r