Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why shouldn't one prefer the original over some rando's weakly motivated, niche NIH rehash, unless you're already victim to lisp-induced Stockholm syndrome?
> some rando's This is a GNU-approved fork > weakly motivated Has lots of strong motivation, like a stricter stance on non-free software, the usage of a "real", more expressive language (Guile) instead of a niche, poorly undocumented DSL (Nix), use of GNU Shepherd instead of SystemD for the init system, among other > niche NIH rehash It shares most of the codebase with Nix, so to say it's NIH is missing the point. Ni…
In Guix, the only code from Nix is the Nix daemon. There is not really much code going back and forth, mostly just bug fixes.