| 20 Nov 2025 |
 whispers (it/fae) | you're fine lmao | 20:31:18 |
 Zelda 🏳️⚧️ [she/her] | gulp 😨 | 20:31:26 |
|  willow changed their profile picture. | 23:17:55 |
| willow changed their profile picture. | 23:18:02 |
| willow changed their profile picture. | 23:19:22 |
| 21 Nov 2025 |
| willow removed their profile picture. | 00:04:09 |
| willow set a profile picture. | 00:04:39 |
 llakala | my issue was marked as a release blocker - i feel so special! | 02:10:00 |
| llakala | ty mr bezarius of snix rpc fame | 02:10:30 |
 raitobezarius | :p | 14:46:43 |
 Sofie 🏳️⚧️ (she/her) | once we eventually have a governance committee for Lix, do you think these would be reasonable goals software‑wise for lix
the things I’m most curious about are:
- a standardized flake replacement (or some kind of agreed‑upon standard for flakes)
- a more “native” tool for deploying to multiple machines, including local ones, the current ones feel clunky. nixopsv4 is interesting at least
- secure build environments (e.g. something that provides a safe way to handle auth/tokens in builds)
- and maybe, someday, even bit‑exact builds
| 17:31:20 |
 522 it/its ⛯ΘΔ | bit-exact builds as in "it's impossible to even make a non-reproducible build in nix"?
| 17:33:26 |
 K900 | 1) out of scope
2) out of scope
3) already being considered
4) bit-exct builds of? | 17:34:46 |
 Charles | i feel like Reproducible Builds has to be considered out of scope, since all a nix implementation can really do there is ensure reproducible build environments | 17:44:29 |
| Charles | it's up to both the existence of a reproducible build environment and the software being built to support Reproducible Builds | 17:45:11 |
| Sofie 🏳️⚧️ (she/her) | ah, yea | 17:45:11 |
