| 19 Sep 2023 |
 infinisil | alejandrosame: Also seeing something similar here https://github.com/ngi-nix/ngipkgs/issues/51 :) | 14:26:49 |
 @alejandrosame:matrix.org | Yeah! I'm also thinking about how to introduce "namespaces". I guess this is really what currently maps to per-framework/language package sets. | 15:07:11 |
| 20 Sep 2023 |
|  nbathum changed their display name from nbathum (he or they) to nbathum. | 04:58:35 |
| nbathum removed their profile picture. | 04:58:45 |
 Artturin | colemickens: the mechanism of by-name will be useful for us in nixpkgs-wayland | 19:05:57 |
| Artturin | * colemickens: the mechanism of by-name will be useful for us in nixpkgs-wayland ^ | 19:07:45 |
| Artturin | * colemickens: ^ the mechanism of by-name will be useful for us in nixpkgs-wayland | 19:07:52 |
| 21 Sep 2023 |
|  dedmunwalk joined the room. | 23:09:49 |
| 22 Sep 2023 |
|  K900 changed their profile picture. | 09:53:32 |
| infinisil | I want to discuss deviating slightly from the RFC. In particular I think it would make sense to disallow definitions in all-packages.nix like foo = callPackage ../by-name/fo/foo/package.nix { }, but only when the argument is { }. | 19:53:27 |
| infinisil | Currently the RFC specifies that an arbitrary argument is allowed here, but there's no good reason to allow { } arguments. | 19:54:51 |
| infinisil | The main reason I want to change this is because I want to have a check to make sure new packages don't add themselves to all-packages.nix unless necessary (which is when it's not { }). | 19:56:08 |
