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?
>>
>> It will probably turn out that you made the right decision by starting
>> a separate project, but at the very least:
>> - You'll may get attention from people who can contribute to Spectrum
>> - The issues involved with be publicly documented and searchable for
>>   future generations
> 
> 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 Qubes
> 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 opportunity
> to consider the system as a whole.

Plus, SpectrumOS does not have to deal with backwards compatibility. If QubesOS
developers were to start implementing these changes, they would constantly have
to deal with trade-offs between ease of implementing them and the cost of
breaking backwards compatibility.

> 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 of
> effort required to attempt it, rather than me.  This could be another
> effort that could be pursued in parallel to my work on Spectrum.

Very much this.

--
Best,
r