| 20 Oct 2024 |
 emily | https://lwn.net/Articles/991088/ | 15:10:22 |
| emily | looks like we're ahead in splitting out gssapi | 15:12:58 |
| 21 Oct 2024 |
 Sandro 🐧 |
Debians poor depreciation processes hitting again | 00:05:06 |
 hexa | says distro who has an ever growing aliases file and other failings | 00:05:53 |
| hexa | * says distro who has an ever growing aliases file, no proper deprecation cycle and other failings | 00:06:28 |
| emily | when was the last time the aliases file actually got trimmed? | 04:45:52 |
| emily | (do we even have a policy for how old aliases have to be to be removed?) | 04:46:38 |
 Fabián Heredia | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
says distro who has an ever growing aliases file, no proper deprecation cycle and other failings the aliases file gets pruned every release though (most warns get turned into a throw and throws get removed, so most aliases should only live up to a year there and be automagically moved along) | 05:55:02 |
| Fabián Heredia | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
when was the last time the aliases file actually got trimmed? I remember doing that in a recent release, I think 23.11 | 05:55:26 |
| Fabián Heredia | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
(do we even have a policy for how old aliases have to be to be removed?) If I remember correctly 1 release for throws then auto-removal) | 05:55:47 |
| Fabián Heredia | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
(do we even have a policy for how old aliases have to be to be removed?) * If I remember correctly 1 release for throws then auto-removal. | 05:55:50 |
| hexa | but fabian | 11:16:05 |
| hexa | removing aliases without a warning is not ok! | 11:16:12 |
| hexa | https://github.com/nixos/nixpkgs/commit/0b6a7a953d7bc7aa453683919c7bbcadad739aa3 | 11:16:13 |
| hexa | https://github.com/nixos/nixpkgs/commit/e72450d032e3e6b28124e73400959cef4f064fd4 | 11:16:30 |
| hexa | * removing aliases without a warning is not ok! \s | 11:16:39 |
| hexa | I'd say there is no consensus on removing them | 11:17:06 |
| hexa | and if you tell the wrong person they'll try to revert 🙂 | 11:17:15 |
| hexa | think of all the downstream consumers that are affected by this | 11:17:31 |
| hexa | * think of all the downstream consumers that are affected by this 🤷 | 11:18:14 |
 SigmaSquadron | the determinate systems community will never recover from this | 11:22:09 |
| emily | so the idea is that we have to go alias → alias with warning → throw → removal? | 11:22:30 |
| emily | seems like that would make aliases.nix the most stable interface in the repository | 11:22:42 |
| emily | I can't imagine any reason to attach dates other than to remove later though | 11:23:10 |
| emily | seems to me like allowAliases is the warning | 11:23:36 |
| hexa | aliases should warn immediately imo 😛 | 11:23:38 |
| hexa | yeah, kinda | 11:23:42 |
| hexa | but I think people want eval traces | 11:23:51 |
| emily | til remove-old-aliases.py | 11:24:14 |
| emily | I feel like the fact that that script exists and that it was in the release process notes indicates a consensus that extends beyond one person's objections. | 11:24:47 |
