| 20 Nov 2023 |
 raitobezarius | And I'm not sure it's highlight worthy, it's Nixpkgs API, it's not totally relevant to NixOS IMHO, alas, we don't have good story for new Nixpkgs API, etc. | 15:41:04 |
| raitobezarius | But technically the place for "Nixpkgs notable changes" is its own section (we have internal changes and etc.) | 15:41:17 |
| raitobezarius | For example, when I wrote the make-disk-image stuff and improved it: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/master/nixos/doc/manual/release-notes/rl-2305.section.md | 15:42:10 |
| raitobezarius | I just put it in some random place | 15:42:13 |
| raitobezarius | I don't think the audience who is interested in lib.fileset will efficiently discover it via this way | 15:42:26 |
| raitobezarius | But I recognize there's a problem into how to highlight such changes | 15:42:45 |
| raitobezarius | I'd definitely highlight it in the Nix ecosystem newsletter for example | 15:43:05 |
 infinisil | In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
But technically the place for "Nixpkgs notable changes" is its own section (we have internal changes and etc.) There's no non-internal Nixpkgs highlights though | 15:43:12 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
There's no non-internal Nixpkgs highlights though Correct, we never had the need for it | 15:43:22 |
| raitobezarius | Because Nixpkgs API is an undefined object | 15:43:33 |
| infinisil | I like to call the API implicit :) | 15:44:03 |
| infinisil | raitobezarius: What if I write a release notes section explicitly for lib changes? | 15:44:19 |
| raitobezarius | an explicitly undefined object, implicily defined, yes | 15:44:30 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
raitobezarius: What if I write a release notes section explicitly for lib changes? That works fine for me | 15:44:37 |
| raitobezarius | (but still not comfortable with a shout-out to company, I prefer to leave this in the introducing PR/eventual blog post and not put this information in the release notes) | 15:45:00 |
| infinisil | (Ideally we'd have separate sections for pkgs, lib and nixos) | 15:45:21 |
| infinisil | In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
(but still not comfortable with a shout-out to company, I prefer to leave this in the introducing PR/eventual blog post and not put this information in the release notes) Does a link to the blog post sound good though? | 15:45:44 |
| raitobezarius | Yep, that's fine | 15:45:49 |
| infinisil | Awesome thanks! | 15:46:16 |
| infinisil | Even if not in the release notes, I will give Antithesis all the shout-outs I can give. They deserve it, they enable me work on upstream Nix improvements all the time <3 | 15:51:45 |
| raitobezarius | That's completely fair, I just don't want to create difficult to handle precedents for this part of the documentation | 16:05:58 |
| raitobezarius | That does not say anything about Antithesis itself of course | 16:06:10 |
| infinisil | raitobezarius: Yeah understandable :) | 16:09:11 |
| infinisil | Though I think if there's any place for shout-outs, it should be the release notes. Maybe we could consider having a section for company shout-outs in the future. | 16:10:50 |
| infinisil | I guess this does invite politics again though (should we disallow giving shout-outs to companies with certain products?), so maybe not 😅 | 16:11:55 |
| raitobezarius | This does invite politics and I am personally not comfortable with it | 16:12:05 |
 @julienmalka:matrix.org | Well if we shout-out companies might as well shout-out all contributors of the release for their free work. | 16:12:35 |
| infinisil | +1 | 16:12:52 |
| infinisil | (though note that not all work is free work, most of my work is sponsored) | 16:13:28 |
| infinisil | (And I'd feel a bit bad for taking all of the credit) | 16:15:55 |
