Planet GNOME

Some brief notes on books, at the start of a summer that hopefully will allow for more reading.

Monk and Robot (Becky Chambers); Mossa and Pleiti (Malka Older)

Summer reading rec, and ask for more recs: “cozy sci-fi” is now a thing and I love it. Characters going through life, drinking hot beverages, trying to be comfortable despite (waves hands) everything. Mostly coincidentally, doing all those things in post-dystopian far-away planets (one fictional, one Jupiter).

Novellas, perfect for summer reads. Find a sunny nook (or better yet, a rainy summer day nook) and enjoy. (New Mossa and Pleiti comes out Tuesday, yay!)

A complex socio-technical system, bounding boldly, perhaps foolishly, into the future. (Original via NASA) Underground Empire (Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman)

This book is about things I know a fair bit about, like international trade sanctions, money transfers, and technology (particularly the intersection of spying and data pipes). So in some sense I learned very little.

But the book efficiently crystallizes all that knowledge into a very dense, smart, important observation: that some aspects of American so-called “soft” (i.e., non-military) power are in increasingly very “hard”. To paraphrase, the book’s core claim is that the US has, since 2001, amassed what amounts to several, fragmentary “Departments of Economic War”. These mechanisms use control over financial and IP transfers to allow whoever is in power in DC to fight whoever it wants. This is primarily China, Russia, and Iran, but also to some extent entities as big as the EU and as small as individual cargo ship captains.

The results are many. Among other things, the authors conclude that because this change is not widely-noticed, it is undertheorized, and so many of the players lack the intellectual toolkit to reason about it. Relatedly, they argue that the entire international system is currently more fragile and unstable than it has been in a long time exactly because of this dynamic: the US’s long-standing military power is now matched by globe-spanning economic control that previous US governments have mostly lacked, which in turn is causing the EU and China to try to build their own countervailing mechanisms. But everyone involved is feeling their way through it—which can easily lead to spirals. (Threaded throughout the book, but only rarely explicitly discussed, is the role of democracy in all of this—suffice to say that as told here, it is rarely a constraining factor.)

Tech as we normally think of it is not a big player here, but nevertheless plays several illustrative parts. Microsoft’s historical turn from government fighter to Ukraine supporter, Meta’s failed cryptocurrency, and various wiretapping comes up for discussion—but mostly in contexts that are very reactive to, or provocative irritants to, the 800lb gorillas of IRL governments.

Unusually for my past book reports on governance and power, where I’ve been known to stretch almost anything into an allegory for open, I’m not sure that this has many parallels. Rather, the relevance to open is that these are a series of fights that open may increasingly be drawn into—and/or destabilize. Ultimately, one way of thinking about this modern form of power dynamics is that it is a governmental search for “chokepoints” that can be used to force others to bend the knee, and a corresponding distaste for sources of independent power that have no obvious chokepoints. That’s a legitimately complicated problem—the authors have some interesting discussion with Vitalik Buterin about it—and open, like everyone else, is going to have to adapt.

Dying Every Day: Seneca at the Court of Nero (James Romm)

Good news: this book documents that being a thoughtful person, seeking good in the world, in the time of a mad king, is not a new problem.

Bad news: this book mostly documents that the ancients didn’t have better answers to this problem than we moderns do.

The Challenger Launch Decision (Diane Vaughan)

The research and history in this book are amazing, but the terminology does not quite capture what it is trying to share out as learnings. (It’s also very dry.)

The key takeaway: good people, doing hard work, in systems that slowly learn to handle variation, can be completely unprepared for—and incapable of handling—things outside the scope of that variation.

It’s definitely the best book about the political analysis of the New York Times in the age of the modern GOP. Also probably good for a lot of technical organizations handling the radical-but-seemingly-small changes detailed in Underground Empire.

Spacesuit: Fashioning Apollo (Nicholas De Monchaux)

A book about how interfaces between humans and technology is hard. (I mean clothes, but also everything else.) Delightful and wide-ranging; maybe won’t really learn any deep lessons here but it’d be a great way to force undergrads to grapple with Hard Human Problems That Engineers Thought Would Be Simple.

It’s summer, which means its time for GSoC/Outreachy. This is the third year the Crosswords team is participating, and it has been fantastic. We had a noticeably large number of really strong candidates who showed up and wrote high-quality submissions — significantly more than previous years. There were a more candidates then we could handle, and it was a shame to have to turn some down.

In the end, Tanmay, Federico, and I got together and decided to stretch ourselves and accept three interns for the summer: Nancy, Toluwaleke, and Victor. They will be working on word lists, printing, and overlays respectively, and I’m so thrilled to have them helping out.

A result of this is that there will be a larger number of Crossword posts on planet.gnome.org this summer. I hope everyone is okay with that, and encourages them so they stay involved with GNOME and Free Software.

Release

This last release was mostly a bugfix release. The intern candidates outdid themselves this year by fixing a large number of bugs — so many that I’m releasing this to get them to users. Some highlights:

• Mahmoud added an open dialog to the game and got auto-download of puzzles working. He also created an arabic .ipuz file to test with which revealed quite a few rendering bugs.

Arabic Crossword

• Toluwaleke refined the selection code. This was accidentally marked as a newcomer issue, and was absolutely not supposed to be. Nevertheless, he nailed it and has left selection in a much healthier state.
  • [ It’s worth highlighting that the initial MR for this issue is a masterclass in contributions, and one of the best MRs I’ve ever received. If you’re a potential GSoC intern, you could learn a lot from reading it. ]
• Victor fixed divided cells and a number of small behavior bugs. He also did methodical research into other crossword editors.

Divided Cells

• Patel and Soham contributed visual improvements for barred and acrostic puzzles

In addition, GSoC-alum Tanmay has kept plugging on his Acrostic editor. It’s gotten a lot more sophisticated, and for the first time we’re including it in the stable build (albeit as a Beta). This version can be used to create a simple acrostic puzzle. I’ll let Tanmay post about it in the coming days. 

Coordinates

Specs are hard, especially for file formats. We made an unfortunate discovery about the ipuz spec this cycle. The spec uses a coordinate system to refer to cells in a puzzle — but does not define what the coordinate system means. It provides an example with the upper left corner being (0,0) and that’s intuitively a normal addressing system. However, they refer to (ROW1, COL1) in the spec, and there are a few examples in the spec that start the upper left at (1, 1).

When we ran across this issue while writing libipuz we tried a few puzzles in puzzazz (the original implementation) to confirm that (0,0) was the intended origin coordinate. However, we have run across some implementations and puzzles in the wild starting at (1,1). This is going to be pretty painful to untangle, as they two interpretations are largely incompatible. We have a plan to detect the coordinate system being used, but it’ll be a rough heuristic at best until the spec gets clarified and revamped.

By the Numbers

With this release, I took a step back and took stock of my little project. The recent releases have seemed pretty substantial, and it’s worth doing a little introspection. As of this release, we’ve reached:

• 85KLOC total. 60KLOC in the app and 25KLOC in the library
• 27K words of design docs (development guide)
• 126 distinct test cases
• 33 different contributors. I’m now at 82% of the commits and dropping
• 6 translations (and hopefully many more some day)
• Over 100 unencumbered puzzles in the base puzzle sets. This number needs to grow.

All in all, not too shabby, and not so little anymore.

A Final Request

Crosswords has an official flatpak, an unofficial snap, and Fedora and Arch packages. People have built it on Macs, and there’s even an APK that exists. However, there’s still no Debian package. That distro is not my world: I’m hoping someone out there will be inspired to package this project for us.

Transparency report for July 2024 to May 2025 – GNOME Code of Conduct Committee

GNOME’s Code of Conduct is our community’s shared standard of behavior for participants in GNOME. This is the Code of Conduct Committee’s periodic summary report of its activities from July 2024 to May 2025.

The current members of the CoC Committee are:

• Anisa Kuci
• Carlos Garnacho
• Christopher Davis
• Federico Mena Quintero
• Michael Downey
• Rosanna Yuen

All the members of the CoC Committee have completed Code of Conduct Incident Response training provided by Otter Tech, and are professionally trained to handle incident reports in GNOME community events.

The committee has an email address that can be used to send reports: conduct@gnome.org as well as a website for report submission: https://conduct.gnome.org/

Reports

Since July 2024, the committee has received reports on a total of 19 possible incidents. Of these, 9 incidents were determined to be actionable by the committee, and were further resolved during the reporting period.

• Report about an individual in a GNOME Matrix room acting rudely toward others. A Committee representative discussed the issue with the reported individual and adjusted room permissions.
• Report about an individual acting in a hostile manner toward a new GNOME contributor in a community channel. A Committee representative contacted the reported person to provide a warning and to suggest methods of friendlier engagement.
• Report about a discussion on a community channel that had turned heated. After going through the referenced conversation, the Committee noted that all participants were using non-friendly language and that the turning point in the conversation was a disagreement over a moderator’s action. The committee contacted the moderator and reminded them to use kinder words in the future.
• Report related to technical topics out of the scope of the CoC committee. The issue was forwarded to the Board of Directors.
• Report about members’ replies in community channels; after reviewing the conversation the CoC committee decided that it was not actionable. The conversation did not violate the Code of Conduct.
• Report about inappropriate and insulting comments made by a member in social moments during an offline event. The CoC Committee sent a warning to the reported person.
• Report against two members making comments the reporter considered disrespectful in a community channel. After reading through the conversation, the Committee did not see any violations to the CoC. No actions were taken.
• Report on someone using abrasive and aggressive language in a community channel. After reading the conversation, the Committee agrees with this assessment. As this person had previously been found to have violated the CoC, the Committee has banned the person from the channel for one month.
• Report about ableist language in a GitLab merge request. The reported person was given warning not to use such language.
• Report against GNOME in general without any specifics. A request for more information was sent, and after no reply after a number of months, the issue has been closed with no action.
• Report against the moderating team’s efforts to keep discussions within the Code of Conduct. No action was taken.
• Report about a contributor being aggressive to the reporter who is working with them, on multiple occasions. The CoC committee talked both to the reporter and the reported person, and also to other people working with them in order to solve the disagreements. The result was that the reporter had some patterns on their behavior that made it difficult to collaborate with them too. The conclusion was that all parties acknowledged their wrong behaviors and will work on improving that and be more collaborative.
• Report about a disagreement with a maintainer’s decision. The report was non-actionable.
• Report about a contributor who set up harassment campaigns against Foundation and non-Foundation members. This person has been suspended indefinitely from participation in GNOME.
• Report about a moderator being hostile in community channels; this was not the first report we received about this member so they got banned from the channel.
• Report about a blog syndicated in planet.gnome.org. The committee evaluated the blog in question and found it not to contravene the CoC, so it took no action afterwards.
• Five reports, unrelated to each other, with technical support requests. These were marked as not actionable.
• Report with a general comment about GNOME, marked as not actionable.
• A question about where to report security issues; informed the reporter about security@gnome.org.

Changes to the CoC Committee procedures

The Foundation’s Executive Director commissioned an external review of the CoC Committee’s procedures in October of 2024. After discussion with the Foundation Board of Directors, we have made the following changes to the committee procedures:

• Establish a “chain of command” for requesting tasks to be performed by sysadmins after an incident report.
• Clarify the procedures for notifying affected people and teams or committees after a report.
• Clarify the way notifications are made about a report’s consequences, and update the Committee’s communications infrastructure in general.
• Specify how to handle reports related to Foundation staff or contractors.

The history of changes can be seen in this merge request to the repository for the Code of Conduct.

CoC Committee blog

We have a new blog at https://conduct.gnome.org/blog/, where you can read this transparency report. In the future, we hope to post materials about dealing with interpersonal conflict, non-violent communication, and other ideas to help the GNOME community.

Meetings of the CoC committee

The CoC committee has two meetings each month for general updates, and weekly ad-hoc meetings when they receive reports. There are also in-person meetings during GNOME events.

Ways to contact the CoC committee

• https://conduct.gnome.org – contains the GNOME Code of Conduct and a reporting form.
• conduct@gnome.org – incident reports, questions, etc.