In reply to @ronef:matrix.org
Querying so we can start tackling prioritization of problems

In reply to @delroth:delroth.net
(and like, normal nixpkgs quality standards aren't high, but for example https://github.com/ngi-nix/ngipkgs/blob/main/pkgs/by-name/freeDiameter/package.nix wouldn't pass...)

From my outsider perspective, "mob programming" is the #1 issue, as I see it as the cause for many of the described symptoms (low efficiency, poor mentoring, poor contributor retention, lack of Nix expertise in group leaders)

I think is fine, as long as someone in the mob is "knowledgable" and able to course correct when needed. But having many people "learn by doing" at the same isn't the most productive.

From my outsider perspective, "mob programming" is the #1 issue, as I see it as the cause for many of the described symptoms (low efficiency, poor mentoring, poor contributor retention, lack of Nix expertise in group leaders)

I think is fine, as long as someone in the mob is "knowledgable" and able to course correct when needed. But having many people "learn by doing" at the same isn't the most productive.

In other words, there should be at least one "mentor" in attendance, or reviewing the work output.

From my outsider perspective, "mob programming" is the #1 issue, as I see it as the cause for many of the described symptoms (low efficiency, poor mentoring, poor contributor retention, lack of Nix expertise in group leaders)

I think this is fine, as long as someone in the mob is "knowledgeable" and able to course correct when needed. But having many people "learn by doing" at the same isn't the most productive. Generally, there's at least someone somewhat "knowledgeable" on a topic, so it's a chance for others to learn.

In other words, there should be at least one "mentor" in attendance, or reviewing the work output.

In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
From my outsider perspective, "mob programming" is the #1 issue, as I see it as the cause for many of the described symptoms (low efficiency, poor mentoring, poor contributor retention, lack of Nix expertise in group leaders)

As a person that was already engaged with Nix and Nixpkgs before SoN and after and a participant of SoN 2023 I'd say about your points:
- low efficiency (I can see why that could be thought, but i debatable and more related to the average expertise of the participants)
- poor mentoring (I felt this was a symptom of the lack of relevant people giving feedback to packages, so related to your last point)
- poor contributor retention (this is more a reflection of the actual feedback loop of nixpkgs contribution experience, not SoN experience imo)

Some extra comments:

- In the end this is an NLnet project, not a NixOS foundation project, so their own pressure on setting their own objectives has to be taken into account.

- Is the nixpkgs contributor set able to team up to do actual knowledge transfer? Will a consensus even be reached on what the acceptable quality of a nixpkgs package is? What to do when one thinks that a reviewer/gatekeeper is doing nitpicking? Where is the feedback of new contributor experience collected?

- The mob programming format at least helped people do some Nixing, due to the social aspect of it. People that would have not done any Nixing, where is that impact accounted for?