| 8 Sep 2025 |
 raitobezarius | (I'm sorry, I'm unable to catch up with this room, so I don't know if there's anything that people are blocked on a core team member or just an active committer, please mention me if so.) | 14:39:25 |
 aloisw | For main the change needs to be stamped by someone with +2 access. Release branches will need code owner override in addition (I will need to fix the CI failures first though, 2.93 and 2.92 are probably flakes but 2.91 needs more effort). | 15:28:31 |
| aloisw | Ok 2.93 was a flake, it is verified now. | 15:29:11 |
| aloisw | The CI unblock stacks are now finished (modulo nix-copy flakes) and review requested from people I believe to have sufficient permission on all branches. | 19:08:22 |
 emily | does anyone have any idea why functional-shell is so flaky | 19:21:17 |
| emily | I'm consistently failing to build it on my branch on Linux to the point where I'm starting to question whether I somehow broke it | 19:21:31 |
| 9 Sep 2025 |
| raitobezarius | I know why functional-repl is like this | 12:37:39 |
| raitobezarius | But I cannot remember why functional-shell | 12:37:44 |
| raitobezarius | In general, I feel like the source of flakiness is sleep as a sync-mutex primitive? | 12:37:58 |
| emily | it was indeed broken by a change I made. specifically when the change is present in both host and guest Nix | 14:58:55 |
|  zrsk changed their display name from zrsk to aciceri. | 15:01:01 |
| raitobezarius | lovely | 16:13:44 |
| emily | raitobezarius: any chance of updating the Lix version drop PR soon? | 18:46:52 |
| emily | Nix is ready for the toml11 bump and CMake 4 requires it | 18:47:08 |
| emily | hoping to land that in the next staging-next cycle so would be good to know what Lix backports are going to be necessary | 18:47:28 |
| aloisw | If we want to do releases with the fixes 2.91 will need a bit more work. The required nixpkgs bumps are performed but C++23 leads to a weird destructor error. | 18:50:42 |
| emily | the idea is to drop 2.91 | 20:41:08 |
| emily | and 2.92 | 20:41:11 |
| emily | it is just waiting on the Nixpkgs PR being updated | 20:41:19 |
| emily | 25.05 will not need it backporting as toml11 will not be bumped there | 20:41:42 |
| 10 Sep 2025 |
|  SomeoneSerge (back on matrix) changed their display name from SomeoneSerge (@nixcon & back on matrix) to SomeoneSerge (back on matrix). | 00:37:56 |
| aloisw | Then only 2.93 is needed which needs the fixes merged and then a new release. On the other hand I'd very much prefer introducing and maintaining a toml11_4 on 25.05 over maintaining the patch for 2.94. | 04:35:07 |
|  cpli changed their profile picture. | 06:36:45 |
| emily | does 25.05 need 2.94? if it released today then it'd only be usable for ~3½ months and only benefit people explicitly opting in, and I assume it won't release today | 18:35:55 |
| emily | not sure what you mean by the patch, but backporting toml11_4 seems fine to me | 18:36:06 |
| emily | but orthogonal to getting the bump in on unstable which is currently blocking CMake 4 | 18:36:18 |
| emily | I don't think we need a 2.93 release because the merged fixes can just be patched downstream, but I do need to know how soon the other releases are actually going to be dropped | 18:36:57 |
| raitobezarius | This week is a bit complicated for me | 18:37:47 |
| raitobezarius | I will see what I can do this evening | 18:37:51 |
| aloisw | It already has it in the form of lixPackageSets.git. | 18:38:23 |
