A question about the pnpm idea: was this PR taken in mind? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/290715
Is this considered a valid approach to pnpm dependency locking, or did the idea author have something else in mind?

I'm asking this because the idea's description states:
(...) this should be a non problem for us if we use a fod fetcher like the nixpkgs npm tooling. Some packages use a fetcher without strong reproducibility guarantees.
Which IMO seems to describe the FOD created in that PR

A question about the pnpm idea: was this (draft) PR taken in mind? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/290715
Is this considered a valid approach to pnpm dependency locking, or did the idea author have something else in mind?

I'm asking this because the idea's description states:
(...) this should be a non problem for us if we use a fod fetcher like the nixpkgs npm tooling. Some packages use a fetcher without strong reproducibility guarantees.
Which IMO seems to describe the FOD created in that PR

A question about the pnpm idea: was this (draft) PR taken in mind? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/290715
Is this considered a valid approach to pnpm dependency locking, or did the idea author have something else in mind?

I'm asking this because the idea's description states:
(...) this should be a non problem for us if we use a fod fetcher like the nixpkgs npm tooling. Some packages use a fetcher without strong reproducibility guarantees.
Which IMO seems to describe the FOD created in that PR

If it's a valid approach and therefore could be used as starting ground for e.g a makePnpmPackage function of sorts, is this idea still on the table for GSoC?

I've submitted my proposal through Google's dashboard for "Nix Internals: Use std::filesystem::path for Path". Please review and let me know if you'd like more information put into the proposal.
Thanks

cc: John Ericson

In reply to @infinidoge:matrix.org
I am intending on submitting a proposal not on the existing ideas list, since it is something I am personally interested in,
As a bit of a spot check, just wanted to kinda throw the idea out there to see what people thought

I want to work on updating and improving the infrastructure for the Xen hypervisor in Nixpkgs, with the main project being a Xen distribution based on NixOS, with pre-made configurable modules to create a minimal and declarative dom0.
This would require maintaining/updating the Xen packages themselves, updating the modules already in Nixpkgs (supporting UEFI being one of the primary issues), as well as working out how best to pre-configure Xen and NixOS to work well together.
(A working name for the 'distribution' itself is XenNix)

In reply to @infinidoge:matrix.org
That said, is there a list of possible mentors (outside of the potential mentors on the ideas list), or is anyone with sufficient experience who fits the hard requirements allowed, given that they submit a PR to apply?

In reply to @infinidoge:matrix.org
At the moment no, since I don't know that many people around here currently. Ideally a mentor will fall out of the sky, however given that that is unlikely, I am/will be going through the existing potential-mentors and seeing if anyone has worked on similar stuff and would be a good fit to ask.

In reply to @janik0:matrix.org
I would suggest you go and ask alyssa ross (qyliss), she is the only person I know who does a lot of nix related virtualization work but I don't know if she would be interested in mentoring for GSoC.