| 25 Jun 2021 |
 David Arnold (blaggacao) | I hear you point as such: nix flake go away so we can release nix | 03:09:29 |
 ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | they should've been developed separately | 03:09:30 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | What are flakes? | 03:10:36 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | * What are flakes? | 03:11:33 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | the thing i'm seeing with this document is a lot of discussion that would be welcome in an rfc | 03:13:02 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
they should've been developed separately A plugin system for nix would be nice. | 03:13:04 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | but this isn't an rfc | 03:13:09 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | it's a discussion about what to do right now | 03:13:17 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | which doesn't mean "rethinking flakes" or changing the implementation | 03:13:29 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
it's a discussion about what to do right now I would be suffering if they where removed omorrow) | 03:14:10 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | In reply to @blaggacao:matrix.org
A plugin system for nix would be nice. nobody needs a plugin system. flakes can be implemented in pure nix at least as a proof of concept, and it would've been easier to hack on the implementation then | 03:14:14 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
it's a discussion about what to do right now * I would be suffering if they where removed tomorrow | 03:14:16 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
nobody needs a plugin system. flakes can be implemented in pure nix at least as a proof of concept, and it would've been easier to hack on the implementation then Sure, we need one. I'm no Cpp expert. | 03:14:31 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | (I don't know even not a littl bit) | 03:14:47 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | (I can barely read the code, half) | 03:14:54 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | In reply to @blaggacao:matrix.org
I would be suffering if they where removed tomorrow sorry you rely so much on an unstable hotly contested feature that should've never been implemented in the first place. | 03:15:07 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | :/ | 03:15:11 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | :/ | 03:15:20 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | You see the problem 😄 | 03:15:35 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | i see the problem is people started relying on an unstable feature and now view it as vital to the ecosystem | 03:16:19 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | So what can we do right now? | 03:16:27 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | what the hell does "unstable" mean | 03:16:29 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | right now? | 03:16:32 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | we can remove flakes | 03:16:34 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | just get rid of it | 03:16:44 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | I guess pushing the URF (outside of an RFC) is not a bad option, especially the Super Stupid Flakes aspect of it | 03:16:57 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
just get rid of it We caan't do that pareto-efficiently | 03:17:11 |
| David Arnold (blaggacao) | In reply to @kity:kity.wtf
just get rid of it * We can't do that pareto-efficiently | 03:17:24 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | i see the URF as more bikeshedding on what flakes should be instead of what they shouldn't be (in nix) | 03:17:52 |
| ash (it/its) 🏳️⚧️ | it's not a serious proposal for how to move forward | 03:18:21 |
