| 6 Jan 2026 |
 spewdins | Makes sense. I understand the reasoning there | 23:58:59 |
| 7 Jan 2026 |
 Randy Eckenrode | Does by-name require the pname to match the folder name? | 01:00:19 |
| Randy Eckenrode | A lot of Swift packages are named swift-foo. I’d like to put them in fo/foo because otherwise sw ends up very full. | 01:00:42 |
| Randy Eckenrode | Just answered my own question. The folder name becomes the package name in nixpkgs. | 01:02:31 |
| Randy Eckenrode | * | 01:02:42 |
| Randy Eckenrode | It appears that Swift SDKs are just a sysroot named foo.sdk. | 03:23:55 |
 emily | "New attribute names should be the same as the value in pname." | 04:56:18 |
| emily | (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/tree/master/pkgs) | 04:56:23 |
 vcunat |
there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
| 08:19:46 |
| vcunat | *
"Should": there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
| 08:20:04 |
| vcunat | I don't know. I'm just dropping the tests to unblock:
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commit/1551a606a703 | 08:51:32 |
 kdn | FYI: I have recreated the VM (launchctl bootout ... && rm -r /shared/dir) and it seems to work just fine now | 12:11:30 |
 eveeifyeve | I can't believe the apple-sdk didn't have a license. | 13:49:38 |
| eveeifyeve | * I can't believe the apple-sdk didn't have a license I just made a pr that adds it. https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/477742 | 13:50:42 |
| emily | we only use API stubs and headers from the SDK | 14:01:43 |
| eveeifyeve | Would that still count tho? | 14:02:01 |
| emily | which are either uncopyrightable or fair use depending on jurisdiction (Oracle v. Google etc.) | 14:02:13 |
| emily | we strip out all non-free binary code | 14:02:19 |
| eveeifyeve | * Would that still count tho? Because it's under copies or redistribution. | 14:02:25 |
| eveeifyeve | I would say still add the licence, because it still matters. | 14:03:21 |
| emily | see https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/185#issuecomment-2743454971, https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/185#discussion_r2009169668 for previous discussion | 14:05:25 |
| emily | it would be somewhat misleading to tag it like this and also break Hydra | 14:05:36 |
| Randy Eckenrode | The omission is following historical practice in nixpkgs. | 14:14:39 |
| eveeifyeve | So I guess it would be considered fair use? | 14:15:18 |
| eveeifyeve | * So I guess it would be considered fair use? According the google vs oracle case. | 14:15:34 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I consider it more of just not talking about it. | 14:15:34 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I think emily would consider it fair use or not creative enough to count. I’m more skeptical. | 14:16:34 |
| eveeifyeve | Same here | 14:16:53 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I’m also not a lawyer, so I’m just continuing to do what we have done historically. | 14:17:10 |
| Randy Eckenrode | I do attempt to remove all executable code from the SDK. The libc++ SDK package doesn’t even ship the experimental PSTL archive. | 14:18:38 |
