!MthpOIxqJhTgrMNxDS:nixos.org

NixOS ACME / LetsEncrypt

102 Members
Another day, another cert renewal43 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
16 May 2025
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaand keyType always has a default09:25:21
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaso yeah, no09:25:26
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaalso can the acme team please just dissolve?09:26:41
@hexa:lossy.networkhexait is clearly m1cr0man who reviews everything09:27:43
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaand then someone active in this room merging the thing09:27:53
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa aanderse, Arian please reconsider your ACME team membership 09:28:17
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaalso https://github.com/orgs/NixOS/teams/acme has no maintainer role set09:33:38
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa m1cr0man: ask in #org_owners:nixos.org to for that role 09:33:59
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa m1cr0man: ok, I think we're good. I pushed the test to that PR, so the only thing missing is release notes entry. 10:45:27
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaI'm grabbing lunch and will run the tests in the meantime10:45:54
@m1cr0man:m1cr0man.comm1cr0man
In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
m1cr0man: ask in #org_owners:nixos.org to for that role
Will do, thanks
10:46:44
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianI have no opinions about the existence or non-existence of the team. It was created in a time where most of this was complete wild-west and it was an easy way for people to ask for review when they touched the module10:47:33
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa Yeah, and no we're years in with the team rarely chiming in on any of the changes that m1cr0man reviews 10:48:04
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaFeels like the third release where we push some final change over the finish line just before branch-off.10:48:20
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa * Yeah, and now we're years in with the team rarely chiming in on any of the changes that m1cr0man reviews 10:48:33
@m1cr0man:m1cr0man.comm1cr0manOh I'm not pushed about it being in before branch off, but for this user it would be nice since it has been open for a long time. I'll try write a change log entry on my lunch 10:48:56
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaThe change does not look breaking to me, so it can in fact be merged before (or even after) branch-off.10:49:49
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianIf the problem is to get something merged after approval; why not use the merge bot?10:50:44
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaThe merge-bot only works for PRs created by r-ryantm11:05:48
@hexa:lossy.networkhexa* The merge-bot only works for PRs and changes created by r-ryantm11:05:57
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaThe issue is IMO that the change has been sitting too long already.11:11:33
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaAnd for no good reason.11:11:44
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyit actually works for all PRs now11:49:42
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilybut I think only for by-name packages, not modules11:49:48
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaThat is news to me11:50:45
@emilazy:matrix.orgemily I think it is long past due for m1cr0man to get commit bit tbh (and I am sorry for not putting more time into ACME the past few years, though I do still look at/sometimes comment on PRs) 11:50:48
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyit was not announced super loudly :)11:50:56
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyoh, maybe it's only PRs made by committers: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixpkgs-merge-bot-committer-pull-request-merge-strategy/5822711:51:19
@emilazy:matrix.orgemilyput a nomination up https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/321665#issuecomment-288651681811:58:10
@m1cr0man:m1cr0man.comm1cr0manOh, well thank you 🙂 I never really wanted to ask as the level of responsibility and commitment it implies is more than I thought I deserve for the consistency in my contributions13:05:08

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6