| 29 May 2023 |
 infinisil | Nice discussion though, thanks for the feedback Alyssa Ross | 12:05:55 |
 Alyssa Ross | yeah, thanks | 12:06:01 |
 K900 | As someone who regularly makes small changes to random stuff, I would much prefer to not by granularly permission'd | 12:06:03 |
| K900 | Though I do think that having the ability to give people more granular permissions would be very nice | 12:06:34 |
| infinisil | I think with stronger nixpkgs teams, such that for every part of nixpkgs there's a timely response to proposed changes, this would work much better | 12:06:55 |
| K900 | I mean | 12:07:05 |
| K900 | "Just fix triage 4head" | 12:07:14 |
| infinisil | Haha | 12:07:20 |
| K900 | Like yes but also it's hard | 12:07:31 |
| infinisil | I guess small steps, and this RFC might even be a small step, because I think the NAT is such a team, and just taking ownership over the files implementing the RFC would be very small in scope | 12:07:55 |
| infinisil | Let's not put it into the RFC for now, but that would be a path forward | 12:08:18 |
 @piegames:matrix.org | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
E.g. the whole idea of separating code into "units", so that the package definition and the NIxOS module are together, would make it easier to give somebody permission to change both at once Modules and packages don't always map 1:1 unfortunately | 12:13:32 |
| infinisil | piegames: I'd say this would only be done when they do map 1:1 | 12:14:06 |
