| 5 Feb 2023 |
 @blaggacao:matrix.org | In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
These groups could be formed by people nominating themselves in issues from https://github.com/nixpkgs-architecture/issues/issues, nominations should probably include how much time per week one can help * I think to break the dam (of market pull), a little bit of official push might be needed. But I also can't predict how easy it would be to mobilize and recruit future owners. | 18:24:41 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | * I think to break the dam (of contributor market pull), a little bit of official push might be needed. But I also can't predict how easy it would be to mobilize and recruit future owners. | 18:24:46 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | ⚖️ a little bit of push & a little bit of pull to see what happens 🤷 | 18:25:58 |
 infinisil | Ah true, maybe for a start it could be mentioned in the weekly discourse meeting notes how people can help out | 18:27:21 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | Very good idea, maybe coupled with a suggestion of strategic topics that the NAT has already in mind to help people match with their vocation. 🤷 | 18:28:35 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | * Very good idea, maybe coupled with a suggestion of strategic topics that the NAT has already in mind to help people make match with their vocation. 🤷 | 18:28:41 |
| infinisil | David Arnold (blaggacao): Honestly maybe that's how all RFC's should be done. Open an issue in the RFCs repository with an idea, have people nominate for working on the RFC together, once there's like 3 people, create a repository to develop it (RFC 138), requiring accepting reviews from each to change the repo. | 18:32:58 |
| infinisil | And another idea related to that: The shepherd team should be separate and be comprised of the code owners, they don't do the work, they only decide. This would be the NAT team for nixpkgs changes, the Nix team for Nix changes, etc. | 18:34:32 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | The own repo work flow is excellent and very close to our all prefecence, you might have seen that I recently posted a link in discourse to frappe/gameplan. I'm still evaluating, but I have a gut feeling that this would maybe further improve our workflows as it increases not only theoric but practical transparency by consistently structuring the conversation. Anyway, just want to mention that in this context, but havn't made my mind up, yet. | 18:49:11 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | * The own repo work flow is excellent and very close to our all prefecences. You might have seen that I recently posted a link in discourse to frappe/gameplan. I'm still evaluating, but I have a gut feeling that this would maybe further improve our workflows as it increases not only theoric but practical transparency by consistently structuring the conversation. Anyway, just want to mention that in this context, but havn't made my mind up, yet. | 18:49:24 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | * The own repo work flow is excellent and very close to our all prefecences. You might have seen that I recently posted a link in discourse to frappe/gameplan. I'm still evaluating, but I have a gut feeling that this would maybe further improve our workflows as it increases not only theoric but practical transparency by consistently structuring the conversation. Anyway, just want to mention that in this context as a research question, but havn't made my mind up, yet. | 18:50:17 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | * The own repo work flow is excellent and very close to our all prefecences. You might have seen that I recently posted a link in discourse to frappe/gameplan. I'm still evaluating, but I have a gut feeling that this would maybe further improve our workflows as it increases not only theoric but practical transparency by consistently structuring the conversation. Anyway, just want to mention that in this context as a research question, but haven't made my mind up, yet. | 18:50:22 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | This argument goes with the assumption that practical transparency is the most gentle and at the same time powerful push tactics of all, among other things. | 18:52:14 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | ^^ which is btw, why I thing your work in the NAT is so powerful. | 18:53:23 |
| infinisil | The jumble of GitHub + Matrix + Discourse might not be the best, yes :P | 18:56:36 |
| infinisil | Still looking for more shepherds for https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/138 btw ;) | 18:58:55 |
 Winter (she/her) | What would a shepherd actually do for such an RFC, @infinisil? | 19:02:50 |
| Winter (she/her) | e.g. what is there to shepherd? | 19:02:58 |
| infinisil | Winter (she/her): https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs#shepherd-team | 19:03:49 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | Make a meeting and call for FCP, essentially? 😃 | 19:04:05 |
| Winter (she/her) | Ah, I see. | 19:04:21 |
| infinisil | Arguably someone from the steering committee should also be a shepherd member, because they are "codeowners" | 19:05:04 |
| Winter (she/her) | Agreed -- maybe write that in the comments? | 19:05:59 |
| Winter (she/her) | * Agreed -- maybe write that in the comments, so they can see? | 19:06:03 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | For what it's worth now or later, I packages frappe/bench so interested parties could start playing around with gameplan, should they wish to. | 19:21:51 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | Thanks to ChatGPT for Nixpkgs this was super easy. 😃 | 19:22:32 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | * For what it's worth now or later, I packaged frappe/bench so interested parties could start playing around with gameplan, should they wish to. | 19:23:11 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | In fact, in the spirit of RFC 140, the hardest part was to find the right folder (and some version overrides, to be honest). | 19:27:06 |
| @blaggacao:matrix.org | It just got harder and became an evangelization issue after playing a little with it. But that's borderline off topic, here, anyways. | 23:42:32 |
| 6 Feb 2023 |
 Gytis Ivaskevicius | Hey guys, not sure what you guys are up to these days but I'd appreciate if you guys could follow up on this blueprints idea, maybe making it a standard in nix ecosystem
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/208020#issuecomment-1419168718 | 14:29:54 |
