<drakonis>
actually, this topic might be a bit more interesting for #nixos-chat
<drakonis>
might be judged too hard though
ehmry has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
ehmry has joined #nixos-exotic
<pie_>
drakonis: some of us seem to be vaguely interested in swh but i think this is another of those things where unless someone takes it upon themselves, nothing will happen?
zgrep has quit [Quit: It's a quitter's world.]
zgrep has joined #nixos-exotic
<drakonis>
i'd say that yes it is indeed something like that
<drakonis>
i'd say we dont quite have as much in the way of principles to have as much interest on these things
<drakonis>
it isnt driven enough for any long term goals that arent directly related to perpetuating nix's continued existence
<drakonis>
i feel like we're still too far from having people using nix to enact some grander long term goal, its almost always using nix for development and due to its humongous repository
<qyliss>
I'm using nix to enact a grander long term goal
<drakonis>
indeed you are
<drakonis>
but the community at large isnt there for that
<qyliss>
yeah, that's true
<drakonis>
looking back to nix half a decade ago, around when i first joined, a couple things may have taken a backseat due to the community growing fast
<drakonis>
reproducibility was a larger concern back then
<simpson>
I don't think that most of the community groks what those longer-term goals *are*.
<drakonis>
hmm, then perhaps it would be best to work on awareness?
<drakonis>
we have a blog now, don't we?
<drakonis>
maybe it would help to talk a bit about those and lay some seeds of awareness regarding those goals
<simpson>
I think that doing what ehmry's done, and actually building further capability-oriented integrations with Nix, is a very useful path forward which *doesn't* rely on people learning a bunch of theory.
<drakonis>
hmm, sure.
<simpson>
I know dckc has thoughts about this. Educating people about capabilities is best done by giving them a capability-aware system and having them learn how to use it in context.
<drakonis>
that's news to me
<drakonis>
which is interesting.
<drakonis>
unless, by capabilities, you meant the genode port
<drakonis>
which i'm vaguely aware of its existence
<drakonis>
it is very useful, nonetheless
<drakonis>
perhaps one of our real issues is how we're too fragmented/divided on handling things
<drakonis>
there is a significant amount of work being done out of tree
<drakonis>
the kind that will never get used
<qyliss>
flakes is going to make that worse
<drakonis>
we have issues with agreeing with achieving a common solution that's available for everyone
<simpson>
Well, a solution to what?
<drakonis>
channel management
<drakonis>
we have niv, flakes and a third option i simply dont remember its name
<drakonis>
there's a very strong divide going on here
<drakonis>
i think tazjin didnt like the direction flakes were going so he went and forked nix?
<qyliss>
that was one of many issues
<drakonis>
there's also nixos modules
<drakonis>
see michael for this one
<drakonis>
he's directly avoiding using the existing modules system for one reason or another
<ehmry>
what is the problem with flakes? I like flakes but I'm not counter-anti-flake
<drakonis>
the process surrounding it was...
<drakonis>
fraught with scope creep
<drakonis>
and there's also the part where flakes is done in nix the binary instead of nix the language
<drakonis>
it gets first class support whereas niv does not
<drakonis>
its also still marked as experimental despite being available for about two or so years?
<drakonis>
there is no spec either
<drakonis>
so it can change at any moment and break existing stuff
<drakonis>
i'm not against it, i think the whole process should've been handled a lot better
<ehmry>
I think its a bit like systemd or nix itself though, there are problems and things are uncomfortable, then comes along strongly unifing solution and then it can't be resisted