| 23 Mar 2025 |
 K900 | Terraform is significantly better at that part than Nixops ever was | 16:35:45 |
| K900 | And Terraform isn't even that good at that part | 16:35:50 |
| K900 | You can use terranix if you don't want to write HCL | 16:36:06 |
 emily | you can use agenix for secrets | 16:36:43 |
 @dmjio:matrix.org | we could just rewrite nixops in haskell | 16:37:17 |
| K900 | You can go talk to @Robert Hensing (roberth) for that | 16:37:26 |
| K900 | He's already rewriting it | 16:37:29 |
| emily | https://github.com/nixops4/nixops4 | 16:37:41 |
| @dmjio:matrix.org | if its ready I'll use it, but is it at feature parity | 16:37:56 |
| emily | how can you say "we could just rewrite nixops" but also not use/contribute to something if it's not at feature parity? | 16:38:12 |
| emily | it's more at feature parity than an empty repository… | 16:38:19 |
| @dmjio:matrix.org | I don't know the rust ecosystem like I know the Haskell one, I've already used hnix and other tools like amazonka to make API calls, I know how I'd do it in that ecosystem. With rust I'd have to relearn all that. | 16:40:28 |
| @dmjio:matrix.org | my understanding is that current nixops is like a wrapper around boto or python fabric | 16:41:07 |
| @dmjio:matrix.org | Robert Hensing (roberth): hello ! đź‘‹ | 16:42:09 |
| @dmjio:matrix.org | how's the nixops4 development effort going, I'd love to use it | 16:45:15 |
 flare | I prefer to use sopsnix | 16:51:15 |
| flare | with age | 16:51:25 |
