!CJXQiUGqNPcFonEdME:nixos.org

NixOS Foundation

458 Members
Public room for chatting with the NixOS Foundation Board113 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
19 Apr 2024
@ronef:matrix.orgronefQuerying so we can start tackling prioritization of problems16:22:32
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.net ronef: nixpkgs gets ~0 tangible value out of SoN, maybe gets indirect value by introducing some new people to Nix but that's dubious, and all the while it's a giant money pit 16:22:50
@tomberek:matrix.orgtomberekThe 2021 SoN was run differently and I would say was far more successful in both upstreaming, bringing in beginners, and onboarding long-term contributors. (report: https://summer.nixos.org/assets/report-2021.pdf)16:23:15
@ronef:matrix.orgronef (also delroth don't know if it was intentional but really loved that this topic was brought up when I'm awake 😅) 16:23:31
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netit's not intentional, I'm just basically on california time right now after spending all night trying to figure out Hydra :p16:23:58
@drupol:matrix.orgPolI'm on walifornia time, so it's fine too.16:24:24
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netin essence uhhh I feel like SoN reports are making a lot of claims that are trivially disputed by public evidence16:25:08
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netI quoted the efficiency one above, but that's not the only one16:25:16
@ronef:matrix.orgronefI also recall that 2021/2022 had better perceived value? Happy to hear if that was the case in other's eyes as well just as a reference point16:25:23
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.org
In reply to @ronef:matrix.org
Querying so we can start tackling prioritization of problems
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)
16:27:43
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netto be clear: I wasn't sure if it was just my own experience/feeling or not, so I've talked with several experienced nixpkgs contributors who said they wouldn't even consider mentoring for SoN because of the "mob programming" format16:30:14
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.net * to be clear: I wasn't sure if it was just my own experience/feeling or not, so I've talked with several experienced nixpkgs contributors who also said they wouldn't even consider mentoring for SoN because of the "mob programming" format16:30:31
@dmills27:matrix.orgDominic Mills joined the room.16:51:02
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa
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...)
was actually authored by one of the organizers of SoN, which is worrying. 😲
17:30:12
@jackleightcap:matrix.org@jackleightcap:matrix.org joined the room.17:49:41
@jonringer:matrix.org@jonringer: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)

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.

19:00:19
@jonringer:matrix.org@jonringer: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)

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.

19:01:09
@jonringer:matrix.org@jonringer: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)

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.

19:35:14
@alejandrosame:matrix.org@alejandrosame:matrix.org
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?

20:32:22
@alejandrosame:matrix.org@alejandrosame:matrix.orgOn the broader topic of mob programming, I don't think it get's rid of the need of having peer review if the team isn't representative enough (for example, in this case, containing at least one nixpkgs committer). I did voice this multiple times during my mob sessions.20:36:02
@alejandrosame:matrix.org@alejandrosame:matrix.orgBut again NLnet doesn't necessarily have the same goals as nixpkgs20:38:15
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netdo you think nlnet is properly aware of what they're getting out of SoN?20:38:31
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netalso, low efficiency isn't really debatable when you take groups of 5 participants and they end up having lower output (even after months of being in the program) than I'd expect a single nixpkgs committer would have in the same unit of time20:41:20
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.net(we've seen this in practice with e.g. pretalx)20:41:37
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.net(where, on top of being duplicated work, the duplicated work took significantly more person-hours than what ended up being done by a single contributor in nixpkgs)20:41:57
@alejandrosame:matrix.org@alejandrosame:matrix.org
In reply to @delroth:delroth.net
do you think nlnet is properly aware of what they're getting out of SoN?
No clue tbh
20:42:28
@janik0:matrix.orgJanik (they/them)

First of all to be fully transparent: I'm one of the facilitator for this year and thus have a financial tie to this project.

  • 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.

that's not entirely true, since it's a project in colab with the nixos foundation and all the financial stuff and contracts are handled through the foundation.

20:44:07
@delroth:delroth.net@delroth:delroth.netalso, even if nlnet strictly set the goals (which I don't believe they do - it's probably fairly loosely defined, as it should be), there would still be significant leeway in how to achieve those goals, and that's the space I think would be worth exploring because I don't believe the SoN methods are being effective20:45:39
@alejandrosame:matrix.org@alejandrosame:matrix.org
In reply to @delroth:delroth.net
also, low efficiency isn't really debatable when you take groups of 5 participants and they end up having lower output (even after months of being in the program) than I'd expect a single nixpkgs committer would have in the same unit of time
My comment of being debatable is more on the point of under which constraints are we talking about. Aka, I'm willing to talk specifics in detail to understand myself whenever I ran projects like this, but also I'm not a person with any decision making impact in any of this.
20:46:10
@alejandrosame:matrix.org@alejandrosame:matrix.org
In reply to @janik0:matrix.org

First of all to be fully transparent: I'm one of the facilitator for this year and thus have a financial tie to this project.

  • 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.

that's not entirely true, since it's a project in colab with the nixos foundation and all the financial stuff and contracts are handled through the foundation.

So then why ngipkgs exists to begin with?
20:47:04

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 10