| 9 Mar 2025 |
 hexa | "collusion and intimidation" 🤦♂️ | 15:44:39 |
 emily | I talk to people on both the Nix and Lix team. it seems like you are angry and just want to assign me to a side so you can dismiss my substantive responses to you | 15:45:05 |
| hexa | yes, feel free to write something up, since this discourse is not really working out for you | 15:45:08 |
| hexa | * yes, feel free to write something up, since this discourse obviously is not working out for you | 15:45:42 |
| hexa | * yes, feel free to write something up, since this discourse is obviously not working out for you | 15:45:49 |
| emily | anyway, I think a lot of rhetoric getting thrown around is dumb, so if you assume I agree with all of it then I understand that my position would look disingenuous or silly | 15:46:02 |
| emily | I do not think we should immediately destroy flakes and break everything forever, or that Nix before flakes was a crystalline jewel of bug-free perfection and no weird path-dependent backwards compatibility concerns, or anything | 15:46:33 |
| emily | I do think that flake internals are weird and buggy enough, and the number of breaking changes resulting from bug fixes that would be considered unacceptable for a stable feature but that would have been awful has been high enough, and continues climbing enough, that were the ecosystem to fork over, say, a declared stability guarantee for exactly one semantics of flakes (already different to the semantics we had one stable version ago), it would be very bad for all parties | 15:48:09 |
| emily | and if you think that both the Nix team, the Lix team, and the Tvix team are colluding to arrive at the position of "stabilizing flakes in a way that doesn't cause huge problems down the line is going to be a delicate process" then… well, anyone managing to establish a robust conspiracy from that coalition might as well be a god, but also I wonder how much time you have actually spent with the codebase? | 15:50:10 |
|  raitobezarius joined the room. | 15:50:45 |
