| 10 Apr 2023 |
 lennart | to keep it on-topic again: raitobezarius please to let me know what days you are in Darmstadt or Munich, so I may join :) | 15:52:29 |
| lennart | * to keep it on-topic again: raitobezarius please do let me know what days you are in Darmstadt or Munich, so I may join :) | 15:52:39 |
 raitobezarius | In reply to @lennart:0520.ch
to keep it on-topic again: raitobezarius please do let me know what days you are in Darmstadt or Munich, so I may join :) I will be there in May, I will try to go to Darmstadt on the 1/2/3 May probably and chain this with Munich after | 15:53:13 |
| raitobezarius | will keep you posted :) | 15:53:22 |
| lennart set a profile picture. | 16:05:17 |
|  @me:indeednotjames.com joined the room. | 22:10:21 |
| @me:indeednotjames.com | hope this is the right place to ask 😅
can we get https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/222197 in 23.05?
because I believe audit falls under release critical packages and the window is closing in roughly a week 👀
| 22:15:17 |
 hexa | it is not, the list of critial packages is closely defined here https://nixos.github.io/release-wiki/Release-Critical-Packages.html | 22:24:02 |
| hexa | it's a bit weird, that we're on a pre-covid release 😕 | 22:25:04 |
| @me:indeednotjames.com | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
it is not, the list of critial packages is closely defined here https://nixos.github.io/release-wiki/Release-Critical-Packages.html I though it is, because systemd (and a lot of other packages) depend on it | 22:25:35 |
| hexa | lots of other distros are on audit>3, so it's probably supported most places | 22:26:54 |
| hexa | * lots of other distros are on audit>3, so it's probably supported in most reverse dependencies | 22:27:03 |
| @me:indeednotjames.com | alright then, sorry for the noise | 22:27:59 |
| @me:indeednotjames.com | In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
it is not, the list of critial packages is closely defined here https://nixos.github.io/release-wiki/Release-Critical-Packages.html * I thought it is, because systemd (and a lot of other packages) depend on it | 22:28:24 |
| hexa | no worries | 22:28:41 |
| 12 Apr 2023 |
| raitobezarius | hexa: llvm is a release critical package but what do we do about llvmPackages_git for example? | 11:45:46 |
| raitobezarius | more generally: for a stable release, do we try to maintain llvmPackages_git (or any "unstable" package like this) up-to-date? | 11:46:03 |
| raitobezarius | or do we want to a release a stable NixOS with a "fixed" revision? | 11:46:13 |
| hexa | no idea | 11:46:25 |
| hexa | never heard of that package 🙂 | 11:46:30 |
| raitobezarius | alright, in that case, my opinion is that it's not shocking to not make llvmPackages_git not concerned by release critical restrictions (same for any _git package which is not "actively" used by downstream consumers) | 11:47:02 |
| raitobezarius | also hexa do we backport zfsUnstable updates to stable releases? | 11:47:25 |
| raitobezarius | because I think this is a similar situation for this package set | 11:47:34 |
| raitobezarius | if we do backport them, it means we never release a stable NixOS with a stable (i.e. fixed revision) unstable (i.e. "_git" or "xxxUnstable") packages, right? | 11:48:08 |
| raitobezarius | also backport criteria for them makes me confused a bit, because their name indicate they should be following closely the "unstable" trunk but it mean almost systematic backport and accepting breaking changes all the time by nature | 11:48:48 |
| raitobezarius | Janne Heß: it would be awesome if zhf.fail could be fixed in time for ZHF | 19:27:31 |
| raitobezarius | zh.fail * | 19:27:38 |
 VladimÃr ÄŒunát | NXDOMAIN? And empty whois? Did it expire? | 19:32:24 |
| VladimÃr ÄŒunát | GoDaddy says that I can register it :-) | 19:34:04 |
| VladimÃr ÄŒunát | Ah, zh.fail | 19:34:29 |
