Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

And now this leads into my thread https://www.mail-archive.com/nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl/msg18287.html :). I'm totally for that, but do note that there is an equivalent problem in deciding who gets "PR approval" access. But, I suppose since we control hydra/whatever and not github, we can roll

Re: [Nix-dev] Building Elm with Nix?

Thanks, Rok and Jakob. It looks like https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/tree/master/pkgs/development/compilers/elm/packages/elm-reactor-elm.nix is drawing in Elm packages somehow, so I may be able to follow that example. I'll make a gist if I can get it working. On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:45 AM

Re: [Nix-dev] Fwd: Wiki is dead

I started writing some docbook. Maybe I will get used to it but writing `foobar` is way more painful that `* foobar` in markdown. Especially in writing I think it's important to be able to move text around without too much overhead so that text can be reworked until it feels right. Thanks god

Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

I think the topic trees idea is great. This is also how openSUSE does things, and they've managed to reproduce something like a Github workflow for packages across a wide range of distros. I think their capitalization on this model, and the generous provision of a build cluster for public use, are

Re: [Nix-dev] Building Elm with Nix?

it looks there is some support for elm packages. not sure about the documentation but you can ping people which touched those files [1]. try to convince them to document it or if you do it yourself even better [2]. [1]

Re: [Nix-dev] Installing CA certificates

Thanks Guillaume; your reply is very informative. I'll investigate as soon as I have a chance and get back to you. On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:42 AM Guillaume Maudoux (Layus) < layus...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just my two cents, but could you test again your openssl command with > `-partial_chain` ?

Re: [Nix-dev] Force a rebuild of nixpkgs-unstable

The current state is pretty bad, but at least nixos-unstable-small seems to have a fixed build already. On 19 Feb 2016 16:39, "nickbh" wrote: > Hi, > > A small nixpkgs commit caused a nixops virtualbox deployment I was working > on to become unbootable. The commit has

Re: [Nix-dev] Fwd: Wiki is dead

Hi, On 22/02/16 00:58, Thomas Hunger wrote: > I've given this a try [1] for the zero-build-failures entry and my experience > so > far was: > > 1/ How do I actually build docbook? > => copy doc/default.nix and adjust > 2/ nix-build is rebuilding GHC 7.8 and 7.10 (for pandoc I think). > =>

Re: [Nix-dev] Fwd: Wiki is dead

2016-02-23 19:22 GMT-03:00 zimbatm : > I started writing some docbook. Maybe I will get used to it but writing > `foobar` is way more painful > that `* foobar` in markdown. Especially in writing I think it's important to > be able to move text around without too much overhead

Re: [Nix-dev] Continuous Integration

> S3 and Hydra PR support I asked Domen earlier on IRC, but in case anyone else is interested, is there any way to contribute to these? If this will go most the way towards continuously updating channel(s) I'll give an arm and a leg. > IMHO it's very often a fault of some builds or tests failing

Re: [Nix-dev] Fwd: Wiki is dead

Hi Eelco, >> I've given this a try [1] for the zero-build-failures entry and my >> experience so >> far was: >> >> 1/ How do I actually build docbook? >> => copy doc/default.nix and adjust >> 2/ nix-build is rebuilding GHC 7.8 and 7.10 (for pandoc I think). >> => Wait 2h. >> 3/ GHC build

Re: [Nix-dev] Fwd: Wiki is dead

On 16-02-20 03:11pm, Anthony Cowley wrote: > The point being that once a wiki item gets a handful of positive votes, it > gets turned into an Issue on the manual for someone with a better > understanding of how things are put together to find it a home. At that > point, the wiki item could have a

Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

On 23 Feb 2016 23:08, "Matthias Beyer" wrote: > > On 21-02-2016 15:28:08, Bjørn Forsman wrote: > > On 21 February 2016 at 15:17, zimbatm wrote: > > > tl,td; I think that we should split nixpkgs/pkgs in two > > > > Another way to do it is the Linux

Re: [Nix-dev] Fwd: Wiki is dead

On 02/23/2016 12:18 PM, Rok Garbas wrote: > docbook is just something that is not known by majority of our community My personal opinion is that this is mostly an excuse. It's a XML subset and everyone should know at least a bit of (X)HTML or similar stuff. Note that for almost all docs we use

Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

On 02/23/2016 05:56 PM, Pascal Wittmann wrote: > On 02/23/2016 12:10 AM, zimbatm wrote: >> Somewhere we also have a tool that tracks CVEs against packages with a >> heuristic but I don't remember where it is anymore. > > This is implemented in nixpkgs-monitor. It is outdated (inactive) for >

Re: [Nix-dev] Continuous Integration

IMHO it's very often a fault of some builds or tests failing (sometimes transiently). Of course, the lag also doesn't help to resolve these issues quickly, but more people actually fixing that stuff might have more impact than HW and infrastructural changes. --Vladimir smime.p7s Description:

Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

On 02/22/2016 10:35 AM, Adrien Devresse wrote: > The way the other distributions solved this issue is by distributing the > responsabilities. A model where a little minority has to approve / > validate the merge each package modification can not scale to a huge > number of packages. IMHO the

Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

On 23-02-2016 16:08:37, Matthias Beyer wrote: > On 21-02-2016 15:28:08, Bjørn Forsman wrote: > > On 21 February 2016 at 15:17, zimbatm wrote: > > > tl,td; I think that we should split nixpkgs/pkgs in two > > > > Another way to do it is the Linux kernel way. Instead of

Re: [Nix-dev] On nixpkgs and reasonable code size

On 21-02-2016 15:28:08, Bjørn Forsman wrote: > On 21 February 2016 at 15:17, zimbatm wrote: > > tl,td; I think that we should split nixpkgs/pkgs in two > > Another way to do it is the Linux kernel way. Instead of splitting the > (git) repository in two (or more) pieces,

Re: [Nix-dev] Building Elm with Nix?

What is packaged is just the compiler and related tools, not the packages from package.elm-lang.org. On Tue, Feb 23, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Rok Garbas wrote: > it looks there is some support for elm packages. not sure about the > documentation but you can ping people which touched those files [1]. >

Re: [Nix-dev] Continuous Integration

There are currently on-going improvements to Hydra to upload built packages to S3 cache instead of central Hydra machine. That should speed up the bulids a lot. Another thing on horizon are SSDs for the central machine. That should get evaluation times down to dozen of minutes instead of hours.