Vladimír Čunát <vcu...@gmail.com> writes: > On 02/11/2017 03:26 PM, Stefan Huchler wrote: >> Maybe we could talk about the status of the project wiki or other >> documentation, if there would ways to improve that. > > Status of the wiki is being discussed right now: > https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/22599 and the rest of > documentation is also touched lightly in there. > > > I'm convinced the stable releases are worth it! In the last several > months NixOS has been patching every single CVE reported in a larger > distribution (through LWN tracker) and backporting all those to the > stable releases. I really find it *amazing* that we manage that > consistently. There are occasional breakages due to some of the > updates, but that's hard to avoid completely and I don't think there > have been many. (There's also the advantage of --rollback :)
I did not claim that stable releases are not worth, that was the original suspect from 1 2 months ago, and it was just a question because I wanted to learn what policies you have. To the rollback feature, the problem is that you have no real seperation between configuration and packaging. That leads for me to have 1 packaging set that works ( a old version from last year), but with a wrong vpn server write-only in the openvpn settings) and a new profile with the correct openvpn configuration but a broken openvpn package version. So is there a way to rollback the --update action, so that new configurations still use the old packages? Else for my problem --rollback is no solution. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
