3 ms·
I agree with the general orientation in favor of the monorepo and transforming package definitions from repos that don't know/care about Nix, then aggregating t
by pxc 5y ago
I agree with the general orientation in favor of the monorepo and transforming package definitions from repos that don't know/care about Nix, then aggregating them. I think the vision where we use Nix mostly by way of Nix code that has propagated into the source repos of various projects, and we simply use that code directly, probably gets it backwards.
> callPackage-style "I am a function of my dependencies" is right
What did you think of Eelco's presentation at the most recent NixCon where he considers defining packages as NixOS-like modules instead of bare functions?
- Ericson2314 5y agoThe TOML one? That might be might be nice, but we should fix the global namespace issues of NixOS modules first. (Sometimes there are scarse global resources to multiplex access too, but that doesn't mean we should only be able to e.g. run only one postgres instance.)