| 28 Mar 2025 |
 John Ericson | Mic92: it's a not a huge deal at all | 17:34:05 |
| John Ericson | not action is fine | 17:34:10 |
| John Ericson | just thought I would let you know | 17:34:15 |
 Mic92 | also with mergiraf support | 17:35:02 |
 fzakaria | https://github.com/NixOS/nix/blob/master/src/libutil/hash.cc#L387
Can I do this from the CLI somehow ? compressHash | 23:30:22 |
 puck | i wouldn't bother, it's a single xor :p | 23:31:00 |
| fzakaria | well im trying to construct the hashes by hand | 23:33:25 |
| fzakaria | not being able to construct things individually is kind of lame. | 23:33:41 |
| puck | well, you need something to actually do the sha256summing too | 23:48:01 |
| 29 Mar 2025 |
| fzakaria | sha256sum exists | 00:30:55 |
| fzakaria | puck: https://fzakaria.com/2025/03/28/what-s-in-a-nix-store-path you can see here | 00:31:23 |
| 30 Mar 2025 |
|  sinan changed their profile picture. | 15:33:35 |
| sinan | 15:34:32 |
| sinan | 15:36:02 |
| sinan | 15:37:57 |
| 31 Mar 2025 |
 roberth | Nixpkgs committers can now triage NixOS/nix issues. (see only slightly longer discourse post) | 17:58:29 |
|  Hemant Baviskar joined the room. | 19:53:29 |
| John Ericson | ElvishJerricco: emily I am happy to talk about it more in real time | 20:07:19 |
| John Ericson | in here, or in https://jitsi.lassul.us/nix-maintainers | 20:07:52 |
 ElvishJerricco | John Ericson: You've got at least 4 nixpkgs maintainers expressing dissatisfaction with the new packaging. It should be clear that something is wrong here. When Mic92 is saying "I could not longer do any work on the code", I think that is demonstrative of the harm I described in my comment. The bare minimum conclusion IMO is that the code is overly complex, and IMO the solution is to delete it and try again. | 20:13:56 |
| Hemant Baviskar removed their profile picture. | 20:14:04 |
| John Ericson | ElvishJerricco: we have to separate "package set" vs "all the other crap involved in trying to make it copy-paste job" | 20:14:46 |
| John Ericson | I know the current thing is not tenable | 20:14:57 |
| John Ericson | but it does not logically follow that that means we have to go all the way back to one giant package with a bazillion different flags | 20:15:14 |
| ElvishJerricco | I think that maintaining status quo with a mono-package is better than making the problematic thing the default. | 20:16:04 |
| John Ericson | I personally found the "big giant package" and "big giant configure script" and "big giant makefile" very daunting to work with, having wrestled with a lot of that in-tree | 20:16:43 |
| ElvishJerricco | it doesn't have to be a choice between those two things; e.g. we could redo it with a simpler and more commonly understood code base. But that would take a lot more time and effort than just returning to status quo | 20:16:45 |
| John Ericson | yes, this is what I am trying to do | 20:17:01 |
| John Ericson | the PR from robert it just the first wee bit of that | 20:17:10 |
| John Ericson | getting rid of /vendor/ the .version | 20:17:19 |
