| 15 Sep 2025 |
 Gaétan Lepage | Maybe we should keep discussing this in https://matrix.to/#/#nixpkgs-review:matrix.org. | 15:31:11 |
 connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | SomeoneSerge (back on matrix)what are we going to use for video calls for our weekly? Signal was fine when it was just us, but my work blocks Jitsi and video calls over matrix. | 15:55:39 |
| Gaétan Lepage | Signal should work just fine with a handful people. | 19:33:45 |
| Gaétan Lepage | When is the next meeting btw? | 19:33:54 |
| Gaétan Lepage | If I understand you correctly, you want to build a local "cache" of build successes/failures? | 19:34:34 |
| Gaétan Lepage | For the second part of your message, you are talking about the "local" evaluation right? We already fetch the eval results from the GHA runs. | 19:35:13 |
 SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | Should we try eight tomorrow? | 22:40:34 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | ^ | 22:40:44 |
| Gaétan Lepage | Sure, which timezone? AM or PM? | 22:43:55 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | am, pacific, iirc | 23:03:24 |
| 16 Sep 2025 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Pacific, AM | 00:35:16 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | 8am would be nice | 00:35:46 |
| Gaétan Lepage | OK, should be fine! | 08:09:35 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | In reply to @connorbaker:matrix.org
8am would be nice @justbrowsing:matrix.org: if you're around? | 10:54:05 |
|  Kevin Mittman (UTC-7) changed their display name from Kevin Mittman to Kevin Mittman (UTC+9). | 11:11:43 |
| Kevin Mittman (UTC-7) | sorry it's 8pm and trying to go to sleep to shake off the jet lag | 11:13:09 |
 ysndr | In reply to @glepage:matrix.org
Signal should work just fine with a handful people. Is there a separate signal group to join, or how would one get into the call? | 12:12:40 |
| Gaétan Lepage | https://signal.group/#CjQKIK7-VLKtqJFT25O_L_5KG1ITydK2Of0zZRau1SPGjuAHEhDIdWbcfVXKTI_ByFI1lY1L | 12:20:32 |
| 17 Sep 2025 |
|  BerriJ joined the room. | 16:08:43 |
| 18 Sep 2025 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | I’ve got a long day ahead of me, but SomeoneSerge (back on matrix)to follow back up on earlier, in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/437723 I made changes to config to allow NVIDIA’s licenses when cudaSupport is true. That means users can build CUDA packages without using the impure flag and providing a custom config with allowUnfree, allowUnfreePredicate, or allowlistedLicenses, just by building off of pkgsCuda or pkgsForCudaArch. I think that’s important for the UX. Also, since we don’t need the impure flag we can benefit from evaluation caching.
Like all Nixpkgs “variants” (the term I’ve seen used to describe different instantiations of Nixpkgs within Nixpkgs, like pkgsLLVM), there is an evaluation cost to using those attributes, but it beats repeatedly editing a config.nix file.
Of course, for out-of-tree consumers (like user flakes) configuring Nixpkgs exactly once when it is imported is preferred, but not everyone can or wants to do that. | 16:13:20 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | In further iterations I’ll try to move the licenses into lib.licenses so they’re available there instead of in _cuda.lib.licenses; we should be using those licenses instead of ad-hoc ones anyway. | 16:15:14 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Which brings me to another great irritation — should older versions of software refer specifically to older versions of the license? Do we need to do something to preserve them or vendor them in tree? If the license contains clauses allowing it to be updated without notice, is that enforceable everywhere? | 16:17:41 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | * Which brings me to another great irritation — should older versions of software refer specifically to older versions of the license? Do we need to do something to preserve them or vendor them in tree? If the license contains clauses allowing it to be updated without notice, is that enforceable everywhere?
Ignore that; licenses are complicated and I can’t give myself a migraine this early.
| 16:18:22 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | Posted a response to the allowUnfree part | 20:11:27 |
| 20 Sep 2025 |
| connor (burnt/out) (UTC-8) | Posted a reply back | 21:45:34 |
| 21 Sep 2025 |
 tomberek | Hey, through the GitHub Open Source security program we can get a significant amount of Azure credits. Would the CUDA team be able to effectively use that? Would that make a difference in the maintenance burden? | 14:10:32 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | I'm afraid that expert-hours are 146% the scarcest resource right now (as always?) | 15:48:56 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | connor (he/him) (UTC-7): repeatedly mentioned he's been experimenting with building nixos images for Azure | 15:49:27 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | If we could have ephemeral azure instances with a mutable nix store that would be amazing | 15:50:19 |
| 22 Sep 2025 |
| SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) | Judging by Gaétan Lepage's emoji reaction, he's already imagining them nixpkgs-reviews going brrrrrrrr. Gaétan Lepage would you have the availability for this one? | 08:01:20 |
