!djTaTBQyWEPRQxrPTb:nixos.org

Nixpkgs Architecture Team

231 Members
https://github.com/nixpkgs-architecture, weekly public meetings on Wednesday 15:00-16:00 UTC at https://meet.jit.si/nixpkgs-architecture52 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
25 May 2023
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius changed their display name from raitobezarius to disko in NixOS 23.11 when.13:32:18
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius changed their display name from disko in NixOS 23.11 when to raitobezarius.13:37:25
26 May 2023
@ss:someonex.netSomeoneSerge (matrix works sometimes) changed their display name from Someone (hates setup hooks) to Someone (still unhappy about setup hooks but oh well).10:47:10
@roberthensing:matrix.orgRobert Hensing (roberth)I won't be able to make the RFC 140 meeting due to traveling. Would have had a chance but got delayed.13:46:50
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.orgWe have one today?13:47:32
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisil Robert Hensing (roberth): There isn't another meeting 13:47:35
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.orgTbf my calender shows one too13:47:53
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisilHuh, I thought I deleted it13:48:11
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.orgBut I still hope that no second meeting will be necessary13:48:23
@fgaz:matrix.orgfgaz joined the room.18:23:53
27 May 2023
@mjolnir:nixos.orgNixOS Moderation Botchanged room power levels.16:40:03
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisil phaer: Can you also review/accept the RFC if you're content with it? Then we'd have an accepting review by all shepherds :D 18:12:57
@phaer:matrix.orgphaer
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
phaer: Can you also review/accept the RFC if you're content with it? Then we'd have an accepting review by all shepherds :D
Yes, it's on my list, I'll try to do so on Monday or Tuesday :)
19:22:57
28 May 2023
@printfn:matrix.org@printfn:matrix.org removed their profile picture.09:04:35
29 May 2023
@phaer:matrix.orgphaerRedacted or Malformed Event09:59:13
@phaer:matrix.orgphaer
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
phaer: Can you also review/accept the RFC if you're content with it? Then we'd have an accepting review by all shepherds :D
Just did 👍️
09:59:33
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.org
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
phaer: Can you also review/accept the RFC if you're content with it? Then we'd have an accepting review by all shepherds :D
You sure? I can't find the approval of j-k somehow
10:17:40
@j-k:matrix.orgj-kadded10:18:38
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.org Good. Given that the only remaining discussion point is around the name of the folder, I'd like to go and announce FCP. Before doing that, I'd like to get a go from one of the authors as well (infinisil, Robert Hensing (roberth)) 10:25:17
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisil
In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
You sure? I can't find the approval of j-k somehow
Oh yeah sorry I must've mixed something up!
10:52:29
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.org Also in the FCP announcement I'll mention that the only open discussion point is the name of the folder, and that the currently proposed unit will be kept unless the discussion converges on a different name. 10:54:46
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisil
In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
Good. Given that the only remaining discussion point is around the name of the folder, I'd like to go and announce FCP. Before doing that, I'd like to get a go from one of the authors as well (infinisil, Robert Hensing (roberth))
All good to me, I haven't pushed anything to the RFC I wouldn't be okay with, would like to hear from Robert Hensing (roberth) as well though. I think niksnut's arguments have been properly addressed here, but it might be proper to add the new arguments to the RFC as well.
10:56:13
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.orgtbf I disagree with a couple of points in that comment, but did not want to open a bigger discussion as it is not really central (I would have if GitHub had at least a minimum of threading …)11:00:09
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisil piegames: How about discussing that here, which points do you disagree with? 11:00:42
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.orgthat was my plan, yes :)11:01:16
@j-k:matrix.orgj-k
In reply to @piegames:matrix.org
tbf I disagree with a couple of points in that comment, but did not want to open a bigger discussion as it is not really central (I would have if GitHub had at least a minimum of threading …)
maybe RFC discussions should go in GH Discussions now? 🤷
11:01:31
@qyliss:fairydust.spaceAlyssa RossDiscourse…11:02:07
@infinisil:matrix.orginfinisilLet's not open this meta-discussion for now!11:02:49
@piegames:matrix.org@piegames:matrix.org

if a new contributor opens up a folder and sees gazillion of 2-letter folders - he'll immediately close the tab and go read documentation about it. This is actually a desirable behavior.

For people who are not themselves familiar with sharding, it is best to read an explanation before interacting with it. For people who are - the contents of this folder will make sense immediately.

11:02:51
@j-k:matrix.orgj-kdies discourse actually have threads? I thought it was just quote replies? kind of like you already get in GH PRs11:02:57

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 9