!NhAsaYbbgmzHtXTPQJ:funklause.de

Nix NodeJS

191 Members
56 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
17 Nov 2025
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them) *

I'm inclined to suggest that maybe we should just drop all of Sindre Sorhus' stuff from nodePackages since he's anti-lockfile and there's no other good solution at the moment. Other than that, it might be time to start filing issues en masse to upstreams

We should definitely make a statement that we can copy/paste and gently edit for each project that hasn't already expressed an anti-lockfile stance

19:36:06
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]
In reply to @tomodachi94:matrix.org

I'm inclined to suggest that maybe we should just drop all of Sindre Sorhus' stuff from nodePackages since he's anti-lockfile and there's no other good solution at the moment. Other than that, it might be time to start filing issues en masse to upstreams

We should definitely make a statement that we can copy/paste and gently edit for each project that hasn't already expressed an anti-lockfile stance

i've considered doing that tbh because of his lockfile stance

just thought it was a bit too petty for nixpkgs >.> though if we do it, fine with me

20:25:10
@robert:funklause.dedotlambdaI don't think dropping is a bad idea. nodePackages has been deprecated forever and if packages haven't been moved out of it yet we can conclude there's no interest in keeping them around21:34:59
@robert:funklause.dedotlambdaHas to wait until after branch-off though21:35:22
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She] i mean thats not necessarily true 21:48:57
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]theres a lot of packages that dont have lockfiles and thats why they haven't been repackaged21:49:24
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She] I'm going to go ahead and do this(draft until post-master branchoff so it'll make it to 26.05) 23:48:34
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]unless you're already working on it ^^23:48:41
18 Nov 2025
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]edit: nvm, made it myself01:39:49
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]https://github.com/nixos/nixpkgs/pull/46274901:40:06
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]github's diff is screwed as always but its ~5k lines removed i think01:41:56
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]yeah manual calculation and the real raw diff is +8,-481901:43:14
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]also, node-packages.nix is under 1Mib! 919Kib left01:44:06
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]* also, node-packages.nix is under 1Mib! 919Kib only! big news01:44:11
@nyakase:matrix.orgHakase (she/her) joined the room.01:57:53
@tomodachi94:matrix.orgTomodachi94 (they/them)Is this after accounting for the above PR?03:11:06
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She] yes 03:11:14
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]thats when looking at node-packages.nix on that PR's branch03:11:28
@shadowrz:nixos.devYorusaka Miyabi joined the room.04:23:32
@robert:funklause.dedotlambda
In reply to @pyrox:pyrox.dev
theres a lot of packages that dont have lockfiles and thats why they haven't been repackaged
There are plenty of packages with censored lock files. So that shouldn't have stopped people from repackaging
06:54:51
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She] true, but I do not want every package still in nodePackages to be repackaged with an in-tree lockfile. Then we end up with a worse version of how it was before I started doing my debloat work, where we have megabytes and megabytes of generated inscrutible lockfiles in-tree. We need a better solution than vendoring, and until one is implemented, I do not want to package projects that do not wish to follow current best-practices 07:02:13
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]Hell, I've been working to remove those vendored lockfiles where I can, because they are in many cases solutions to problems that don't exist, or a symptom of using old tooling(such as mkYarnPackage) where using new tooling allows getting rid of giant vendored lockfiles and helps decrease nixpkgs' bloat(ref: #327064)07:04:04
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]Let's consider how tomodachi94 mentioned above that awesome-lint's lockfile was 307Kb when generated. Considering how there are 44 packages in nodePackages on the master branch right now, if we moved all of those out and they all had the exact same lockfile size, that would be 13.5Mb of lockfiles. While yes, some would be larger and some would be smaller, my point is that this is a gigantic amount of generated data that does nothing but increase the download size of the nixpkgs tarball too much proportional to the amount of packages it adds to the set. Also, just 3 of those lockfiles would equal the entire 44-package set size right now on my reduced branch, and 10 would be the same size as the nodePackages set at its largest(when it had way over 100 packages!). Considering that, its frankly better to keep packages in nodePackages if the alternative is vendoring a lockfile, but my opinion is to just drop any that do not have a lockfile if upstream rejects having one.07:16:11
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]Hope that makes sense, and sorry for the ramble07:16:17
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]* Let's consider how tomodachi94 mentioned above that awesome-lint's lockfile was 307Kb when generated. Considering how there are 44 packages in nodePackages on the master branch right now, if we moved all of those out and they all had the exact same lockfile size, that would be 13.5Mb of lockfiles. While yes, some would be larger and some would be smaller, my point is that this is a gigantic amount of generated data that does nothing but increase the download size of the nixpkgs tarball too much proportional to the amount of packages it adds to the set. Also, just 3 of those lockfiles would equal the entire 37-package set size right now on my sindresorhus removal branch, and 10 would be the same size as the nodePackages set at its largest(when it had way over 100 packages!). Considering that, its frankly better to keep packages in nodePackages if the alternative is vendoring a lockfile, but my opinion is to just drop any that do not have a lockfile if upstream rejects having one.07:21:04
@robert:funklause.dedotlambdaI totally agree. I was only arguing in favor of removal, not in favor of vendoring more lock files07:41:08
@c0ba1t:matrix.orgCobalt Regarding the earlier discussion of lockfiles, how feasible would it be to extend the existing tooling for importNpmLock to pnpm? 11:46:41
@c0ba1t:matrix.orgCobalt I might be looking at having to support pnpm soon-ish and would rather write some rust then go back to FODs 11:46:41
@fugi:fugi.devLyn changed their display name from Fugi to Lyn.13:37:46
@pyrox:pyrox.devdish [Fox/It/She]I'd rather extend prefetch-npm-deps since that's the tooling used with buildNpmPackage17:26:12

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6