| 19 Apr 2024 |
 @delroth:delroth.net | Pol: the written documents claim that the aim is to upstream stuff but all the actions from the SoN admins go against that - the existence of ngipkgs is almost on its own an admission that their effort can't actually meet normal nixpkgs quality standards | 16:21:20 |
| @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...) | 16:21:32 |
| @delroth:delroth.net | (for very good reasons) | 16:21:36 |
 ronef | What's the biggest problem items today from your perspective?
Seems to me that there's a value problem, velocity? | 16:21:48 |
 Pol | I know, I have been asked for helped in the ngipkgs repo, I was really surprised that stuff were merged as-is. | 16:22:02 |
| ronef | Querying so we can start tackling prioritization of problems | 16:22:32 |
| @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 | The 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 |
