| 5 Feb 2023 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | ^^ which is btw, why I thing your work in the NAT is so powerful. | 18:53:23 |
infinisil | The jumble of GitHub + Matrix + Discourse might not be the best, yes :P | 18:56:36 |
infinisil | Still looking for more shepherds for https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/138 btw ;) | 18:58:55 |
Winter (she/her) | What would a shepherd actually do for such an RFC, @infinisil? | 19:02:50 |
Winter (she/her) | e.g. what is there to shepherd? | 19:02:58 |
infinisil | Winter (she/her): https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs#shepherd-team | 19:03:49 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | Make a meeting and call for FCP, essentially? 😃 | 19:04:05 |
Winter (she/her) | Ah, I see. | 19:04:21 |
infinisil | Arguably someone from the steering committee should also be a shepherd member, because they are "codeowners" | 19:05:04 |
Winter (she/her) | Agreed -- maybe write that in the comments? | 19:05:59 |
Winter (she/her) | * Agreed -- maybe write that in the comments, so they can see? | 19:06:03 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | For what it's worth now or later, I packages frappe/bench so interested parties could start playing around with gameplan, should they wish to. | 19:21:51 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | Thanks to ChatGPT for Nixpkgs this was super easy. 😃 | 19:22:32 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | * For what it's worth now or later, I packaged frappe/bench so interested parties could start playing around with gameplan, should they wish to. | 19:23:11 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | In fact, in the spirit of RFC 140, the hardest part was to find the right folder (and some version overrides, to be honest). | 19:27:06 |
@blaggacao:matrix.org | It just got harder and became an evangelization issue after playing a little with it. But that's borderline off topic, here, anyways. | 23:42:32 |
| 6 Feb 2023 |
Gytis Ivaskevicius | Hey guys, not sure what you guys are up to these days but I'd appreciate if you guys could follow up on this blueprints idea, maybe making it a standard in nix ecosystem https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/208020#issuecomment-1419168718 | 14:29:54 |
figsoda | In reply to @gytis-ivaskevicius:matrix.org Hey guys, not sure what you guys are up to these days but I'd appreciate if you guys could follow up on this blueprints idea, maybe making it a standard in nix ecosystem https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/208020#issuecomment-1419168718 The blueprints still looks very nixpkgs-esque to me
I believe that we should not encourage people to depend on nixpkgs and this should be resolved in nix itself.
I can see a callPackage like pattern being lifted to the nix level (maybe in a separate repository core, kind of like nixpkgs.lib), but things like stdenv are strictly nixpkgs, it breaking change in nixpkgs will cause this flake to break, and I'm not seeing anything that refers to nixpkgs in the flake outputs.
about the issue, I like the perSystem pattern that flake-parts uses, maybe this can be supported in a more official way (something in nixpkgs like nixosSystem, or even ootb flakes support)
| 14:56:25 |
figsoda | In reply to @gytis-ivaskevicius:matrix.org Hey guys, not sure what you guys are up to these days but I'd appreciate if you guys could follow up on this blueprints idea, maybe making it a standard in nix ecosystem https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/208020#issuecomment-1419168718 * The blueprints still looks very nixpkgs-esque to me
I believe that we should not encourage people to depend on nixpkgs and this should be resolved in nix itself.
I can see a callPackage like pattern being lifted to the nix level (maybe in a separate repository core, kind of like nixpkgs.lib), but things like stdenv are strictly nixpkgs, it having a breaking change in nixpkgs will cause this flake to break, and I'm not seeing anything that refers to nixpkgs in the flake outputs.
about the issue, I like the perSystem pattern that flake-parts uses, maybe this can be supported in a more official way (something in nixpkgs like nixosSystem, or even ootb flakes support)
| 14:59:45 |
figsoda | * The blueprints still looks very nixpkgs-esque to me
I believe that we should not encourage people to depend on nixpkgs and this should be resolved in nix itself.
I can see a callPackage like pattern being lifted to the nix level (maybe in a separate repository core, kind of like nixpkgs.lib), but things like stdenv are strictly nixpkgs, it having a breaking change in nixpkgs will cause this flake to break, and I'm not seeing anything that refers to nixpkgs in the flake outputs.
about the issue, I like the perSystem pattern that flake-parts uses, maybe this can be supported in a more official way (something in nixpkgs like nixosSystem, or even ootb support in nix)
| 15:02:43 |
infinisil | @room: The next meeting will take place in ~10 minutes, we'll be there to discuss RFC 140 - meeting link - live stream - meeting notes | 15:21:39 |
Gytis Ivaskevicius |
I can see a callPackage like pattern being lifted to the nix level (maybe in a separate repository core, kind of like nixpkgs.lib), but things like stdenv are strictly nixpkgs, it having a breaking change in nixpkgs will cause this flake to break, and I'm not seeing anything that refers to nixpkgs in the flake outputs.
No, I think this should stay part of nixpkgs. Just that users have a fool proof option to make package depend on whichever nixpkgs revision they feel like
about the issue, I like the perSystem pattern that flake-parts uses, maybe this can be supported in a more official way (something in nixpkgs like nixosSystem, or even ootb support in nix)
perSystem is not part of the idea, it's being addressed as a separate issue. Quite possibly differently
| 15:23:02 |
nbp | In reply to @figsoda:matrix.org
The blueprints still looks very nixpkgs-esque to me
I believe that we should not encourage people to depend on nixpkgs and this should be resolved in nix itself.
I can see a callPackage like pattern being lifted to the nix level (maybe in a separate repository core, kind of like nixpkgs.lib), but things like stdenv are strictly nixpkgs, it having a breaking change in nixpkgs will cause this flake to break, and I'm not seeing anything that refers to nixpkgs in the flake outputs.
about the issue, I like the perSystem pattern that flake-parts uses, maybe this can be supported in a more official way (something in nixpkgs like nixosSystem, or even ootb support in nix)
Let's hope not, as my plan was to get rid of its crappy logic to make it trivially extensible. | 15:25:10 |
infinisil | In reply to @gytis-ivaskevicius:matrix.org Hey guys, not sure what you guys are up to these days but I'd appreciate if you guys could follow up on this blueprints idea, maybe making it a standard in nix ecosystem https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/208020#issuecomment-1419168718 We're currently focusing on RFC 140 as the first major change, but after that's done and implemented we'll have to find the next thing to work on, which might be something from the future work section, from the other NAT issues or something else | 15:26:09 |
infinisil | There was also a discussion yesterday about parallelising the work more | 15:26:34 |
infinisil | I think it all hinges on making that first RFC a success though | 15:27:56 |
growpotkin1 | A fool proof way to depend on a particular version is a pinned form of Nixpkgs in a flake. You can pin an arbitrary number and create an overlay to cherry pick. | 15:30:15 |
growpotkin1 | Override is your friend also | 15:31:01 |
infinisil | Ehh, overlays and overrides have serious composability problems, I really think we need something better to replace them | 15:31:22 |
infinisil | John Ericson Robert Hensing (roberth) tomberek: Joining? | 15:32:26 |