| 17 Jun 2021 |
 @hexa:lossy.network | let's leave it until the weekend | 21:58:54 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | or later | 21:58:55 |
 balsoft | I suppose it may be best to just fork these packages, rename them, remove all contact information (but keep the copyright notice as per the license) and ship those? I think it's best for everybody. | 22:10:19 |
| balsoft | That way, if it "harms user experience" it no longer harms upstream, since the project's name is completely different | 22:12:04 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | pretty sure he is talking abouth home-assistant when he talks about upstream now | 22:13:30 |
| balsoft | In that case, is it really up to him to decide? He's not the only contributor. | 22:14:01 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | part of the firm they founded to support them doing development and stuff | 22:14:34 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | they cannot reasonably prevent us from packaging this, and the orange page didn't respond too well to the first time he tried to push that narrative | 22:15:23 |
| balsoft | Using orange page as the moral compass doesn't seem right | 22:15:44 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | dotlambda: pretty sure we would get closer to the "expected user experience" if we offered a switch that just enabled all components | 22:16:08 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | no, it does not, but they budged after that happened | 22:16:34 |
| balsoft | Maybe we should be even more explicit that home-assistant in NixOS does not provide any "expected user experience", is available "as-is" and probably doesn't work? | 22:16:52 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | it probably does work, me and other are using it | 22:17:07 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Home_Assistant#Limited_upstream_support | 22:17:23 |
| balsoft | Yes, I use it too :) | 22:17:26 |
 dotlambda | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
dotlambda: pretty sure we would get closer to the "expected user experience" if we offered a switch that just enabled all components i.e. skipPip = false | 22:18:04 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/nixos/modules/services/misc/home-assistant.nix#L69-L71 | 22:18:01 |
| balsoft | But maybe we should make more effort to accomodate the wishes of upstream, if not for ethical reasons then just for community image | 22:18:10 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | keeping up with packaging home-assistant is enough of a time sink | 22:18:44 |
| balsoft | Or, I guess the ultimate solution is to move this from nixpkgs to a separate repo, exposing it via NUR and flakes | 22:19:17 |
| balsoft |
I'd like to chime in this discussion, as a happy user of home-assistant running on my NixOS server. While the experience may not be as smooth as that on any of the officially supported platforms, I believe the immutable and declarative nature of NixOS makes up for it in the fearless tinkering with the system and rolling it back if anything goes wrong. I would like to note that I never filed any issues or asked for support upstream, solving my issues myself or with help from other people in the NixOS community.
@frenck , while I recognize your concerns, please reconsider this. It would be a really sad situation for me (and other NixOS home automation enthusiasts) if this distribution of home-assistant with the Nix-based dependency tree ceased to exist.
Would you mind if I post that there? It's all absolutely true but I don't want to mess with whatever plan of action you guys have. | 22:34:06 |
| dotlambda | In reply to @balsoft:balsoft.ru
Or, I guess the ultimate solution is to move this from nixpkgs to a separate repo, exposing it via NUR and flakes That would create so much breakage with every bump of Python packages in Nixpkgs and that breakage would be harder to catch. | 22:20:22 |
 Zhaofeng Li | Let's not post anything now I'd say, given that we've already been through it once before | 22:36:27 |
| balsoft | I haven't seen any actual user experiences posted in the discussion, is was mostly technical | 22:37:04 |
| @hexa:lossy.network | yes, please refrain from commenting until we've reached some consensus | 22:37:04 |
| balsoft | In reply to @balsoft:balsoft.ru
I haven't seen any actual user experiences posted in the discussion, is was mostly technical (and I think it's obvious that technical discussion isn't going to go anywhere) | 22:37:33 |
| dotlambda | In reply to @balsoft:balsoft.ru
I'd like to chime in this discussion, as a happy user of home-assistant running on my NixOS server. While the experience may not be as smooth as that on any of the officially supported platforms, I believe the immutable and declarative nature of NixOS makes up for it in the fearless tinkering with the system and rolling it back if anything goes wrong. I would like to note that I never filed any issues or asked for support upstream, solving my issues myself or with help from other people in the NixOS community.
@frenck , while I recognize your concerns, please reconsider this. It would be a really sad situation for me (and other NixOS home automation enthusiasts) if this distribution of home-assistant with the Nix-based dependency tree ceased to exist.
Would you mind if I post that there? It's all absolutely true but I don't want to mess with whatever plan of action you guys have. Please don't. He can search the upstream issues himself to find out that there's only about 10 filed by NixOS users and none were filed without belong there. | 22:37:36 |
| Zhaofeng Li | What's really puzzling me is why frenck is even doing this: Is he talking to us like we are some amnesiac NPC in a game? | 22:37:49 |
| balsoft | In reply to @robert:funklause.de
That would create so much breakage with every bump of Python packages in Nixpkgs and that breakage would be harder to catch. I can't see why, if the nixpkgs version would be pinned | 22:38:49 |
| dotlambda | Since he doesn't, h | 22:37:53 |
