| 11 May 2025 |
 SigmaSquadron | There's a low-impact module removal on #406192. The freeze has already happened, so technically we can't remove modules anymore, but at the same time, we can't really ship an unmaintained module. | 16:14:39 |
 emily | I'm a little confused as to the motivation of the removal. (but it's their decision to stop maintaining it) | 16:26:35 |
 ma27 | I'm even more confused on why this got ever accepted (let alone proposed) fwiw. | 16:29:46 |
| emily | because the packages aren't split, or because it takes ownership of Nginx config, or? | 16:31:09 |
| ma27 | I'm talking about:
This was more of a test for me, where I wanted to create a complex project and handle the whole local development, deployment and distribution process with Nix and NixOS, to learn more about it and see how far I could go with it
This sounds like a questionable rationale for putting something into nixpkgs tbh | 16:33:13 |
| emily | right. well, the original PR doesn't show any sign of that :) it just looks like a "fairly" normal package/service | 16:33:34 |
| emily | hence my confusion | 16:33:38 |
| emily | well… I see some sign of why the contributor might not want to maintain it there. though the months gap still confuses me | 16:34:23 |
 WeetHet | What... why add it in first place if you're gonna remove it a couple months later. What do they mean by a test... | 16:52:52 |
| WeetHet | I'm confused | 16:53:02 |
|  @flormptormpus:matrix.org joined the room. | 18:08:20 |
| 13 May 2025 |
|  Honnip joined the room. | 06:30:11 |
 Alyssa Ross | Would be nice if we could have a staging-25.05 branch already, or at least a label, so we don't have to keep track of which PRs need backporting out of band until branch-off. | 13:53:48 |
| emily | yeah I think we discussed last release that we should probably branch staging off before master | 13:54:13 |
| emily | or just do the whole branch-off at the same moment staging opens up for breaking changes | 13:54:27 |
 leona | I will now just create it. I didn't find it in the last release discussion and nobody mentioned it (before Grimmauld (any/all) a few days ago | 13:56:00 |
 Vladimír Čunát | From the current staging-next, I assume. | 13:56:47 |
| emily | IIRC I don't think it's part of the standard procedures to do it at this point. (it would just be an improvement on the standard procedures) | 13:58:43 |
| Alyssa Ross | A 25.11 release notes document would also be nice so we could start collecting descriptions of breaking changes on staging. | 15:00:25 |
| emily | I personally think it would be nice if there was never a point where we can't land breaking changes somewhere (but I guess the idea of having a freeze prior to branch-off is to focus efforts on ZHF?) | 15:05:14 |
| emily | i.e. we would just branch off everything at the exact point of the freeze | 15:05:32 |
| SigmaSquadron | I would also really like that. | 15:05:48 |
| Alyssa Ross | that would make sense | 15:05:50 |
| leona | staging-25.05 and staging-next-25.05 exists now, periodic merge is set up for that too. (for now master -> staging-next-25.05) | 15:51:40 |
| Alyssa Ross | Great! | 15:53:15 |
| leona | release-notes too. | 15:55:00 |
| Alyssa Ross | Backports are working, just tested :) | 15:55:27 |
 hexa | please document the steps required for setting up the branches early in the release wiki | 16:26:05 |
| hexa | I know it was discussed many times, but thanks for making it happen the first time 🙂 | 16:26:23 |
| emily | should we branch off master too? | 17:02:08 |
