| 5 Feb 2024 |
 infinisil | Not exclusive to the ratchet checks, so probably something else | 19:52:23 |
| infinisil | And also it's well suited to handle CI for things outside pkgs/by-name too (like ensuring things evaluate) | 19:52:44 |
| infinisil | Could be integrated into ofborg perhaps, though it's not quite the same | 19:53:29 |
 Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Yeah, true. I like "ratchet" because most of the checks there aren't binary pass/fail, but are incremental. But the name could be as general as "linter". | 19:53:52 |
| infinisil | Most checks are fairly binary actually! | 19:54:14 |
| infinisil | See https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/tree/master/pkgs/test/nixpkgs-check-by-name#validity-checks | 19:54:45 |
| infinisil | I guess people are most likely to run into the ratchet checks though :) | 19:55:29 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Yeah, agree. | 19:55:56 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Maybe "nixpkgs-vet" because it "vets" nixpkgs architecture? | 19:56:13 |
| infinisil | Oh I like that | 19:56:37 |
| infinisil | Opened https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/286559 | 20:11:51 |
| infinisil | Won't prioritise this right now, but at least it's tracked this way | 20:12:10 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Do you have the access rights to create a nixos repository? Or is just these folks? | 20:37:15 |
| infinisil | Philip Taron (UTC-8): Not sure who has that, but I definitely don't :) | 20:49:43 |
| 6 Feb 2024 |
| infinisil | @room: The next meeting will take place in ~60 minutes, please add any agenda items to the meeting notes: meeting link - meeting notes
I think this might be the last meeting of the "Nixpkgs architecture team", as I plan on tearing down the team itself, replacing it with more of an "interest group". Feel free to join to talk about that
| 12:59:15 |
| 8 Feb 2024 |
| infinisil | For pkgs/by-name, here's a code refactoring that discovered a bug: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/287083
Feel free to review, but I intend to self-merge this week
| 00:16:26 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
For pkgs/by-name, here's a code refactoring that discovered a bug: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/287083
Feel free to review, but I intend to self-merge this week
✅, good to merge | 01:25:24 |
| infinisil | Philip Taron (UTC-8): Nice, thanks for the quick review | 01:31:53 |
| infinisil | * Philip Taron (UTC-8): Nice, thanks for the quick review! | 01:31:55 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
Philip Taron (UTC-8): Nice, thanks for the quick review! And ✅ again. | 01:40:13 |
| infinisil | ❤️ | 01:40:25 |
| infinisil | Philip Taron (UTC-8): Btw the ratchet stuff allows some really nice follow ups for the automated migration | 01:40:58 |
| infinisil | Currently this ToNixpkgsProblem trait only has one method to compare two Nixpkgs versions against each other (or rather, give an appropriate error for that): https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/test/nixpkgs-check-by-name/src/ratchet.rs#L77-L88 | 01:41:58 |
| infinisil | To implement migration, we can just add another method to the trait, which gets the value of a single Loose ratchet, which are exactly the ones that can be migrated! | 01:43:09 |
| infinisil | So effectively all the checking code doesn't need to change, and we can use it both to check that new code doesn't use outdated patterns, and to figure out where outdated patterns are that can be migrated! | 01:44:10 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | That's really nifty. | 01:45:54 |
| infinisil | A bit hard to explain in text though, I'll make a PR to implement this soon :D | 01:45:59 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | Are you imagining an "autofix" mode? | 01:46:49 |
| infinisil | Philip Taron (UTC-8): Yup! | 01:47:23 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I love to see it. Every lint and vet tool needs one. 😀 | 01:47:41 |
