4 ms·

Out of curiosity, do you object to the existence of services like Cachix, Nixbuild, and Garnix, which also do not have open source backends?

_cenw 2y ago
If their founder was the person with principal control over what goes into CppNix, yes.
- biggestlou 2y ago
  Is there a Nix-based company co-founded by Eelco Dolstra to which you wouldn't object?
  - _cenw 2y ago
    Sure, but you seem to sidestep the primary accusation that Nix itself got neglected in favor of DetSys. Which is most certainly true for at least the installer.
    - biggestlou 2y ago
      The expectation seems to be that Eelco work on Nix full time for free lest he be accused of neglect. Is there a way for Eelco to make money that you would approve of?
      - _cenw 2y ago
        I would've replied to you but HN's intransparent timeout mechanism hit me. I'd invite everyone to wonder why Lix exists (and is better enough to be used in some parts of Nix's CI now), why CppNix stable was stuck 6 versions behind on nixpkgs until half a year ago, and what kept Lix contributors from working on CppNix instead. Tip: "I want free labor from Eelco" is not the answer.
      - justinrubek 2y ago
        Nobody said this. I suggest that you not escalate the discussion in this direction. You're obviously biased given involvement with detsys, nobody expects you to think differently. This crass dismissal off the issue with a strawman isn't right.
    - kokada 2y ago
      I don't get this argument. It is clear that if it wasn't for DetSys making a better installer, we wouldn't have one, period. And now there is some movement from NixOS to bring the new installer as a replacement of the old one: https://github.com/NixOS/experimental-nix-installer https://github.com/NixOS/experimental-nix-installer. It doesn't seem that Eelco or anyone in CppNix is actively trying to sabotage the improvement in the installer, but they simple don't care enough to improve the situation (that is fair enough, I assume most in the core team use NixOS).
nothrabannosir 2y ago
Is that a fair comparison? FTA: > Even if you can (ideally) pull a path from a cache instead of building it, you still have to pay Nix’s evaluation tax in determining the derivation’s store path in the first place. [...] Fortunately, FlakeHub now offers an elegant solution to this problem: resolved store paths. If I may paraphrase: > [fundamental problem with Nix] -> [proprietary solution]. Cachix and nixbuild feel like they're solving something at a different layer. They fit into the existing Nix ecosystem (binary cache, builders) and just provide a hosted version of an existing concept. They don't change anything fundamental about Nix. Maybe a better comparison would be devenv?
- _cenw 2y ago
  I don't object to the product, I object to DetSys moving CppNix into more of an de-facto open core product[1]. This is just a symptom. DetSys contributes the majority of the code that actually gets prioritized and merged (because the maintainer is a DetSys employee), but asking them to build better caching mechanisms into CppNix (which, to be clear, I never asked, that's just Luc's strawman of me) instead of their proprietary product is suddenly "asking Eelco to work for free". [1]: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/announcing-determinate-nix/54709/ https://discourse.nixos.org/t/announcing-determinate-nix/547...

_cenw 2y ago

If their founder was the person with principal control over what goes into CppNix, yes.

biggestlou 2y ago
Is there a Nix-based company co-founded by Eelco Dolstra to which you wouldn't object?
- _cenw 2y ago
  Sure, but you seem to sidestep the primary accusation that Nix itself got neglected in favor of DetSys. Which is most certainly true for at least the installer.
  - biggestlou 2y ago
    The expectation seems to be that Eelco work on Nix full time for free lest he be accused of neglect. Is there a way for Eelco to make money that you would approve of?
    - _cenw 2y ago
      I would've replied to you but HN's intransparent timeout mechanism hit me. I'd invite everyone to wonder why Lix exists (and is better enough to be used in some parts of Nix's CI now), why CppNix stable was stuck 6 versions behind on nixpkgs until half a year ago, and what kept Lix contributors from working on CppNix instead. Tip: "I want free labor from Eelco" is not the answer.
    - justinrubek 2y ago
      Nobody said this. I suggest that you not escalate the discussion in this direction. You're obviously biased given involvement with detsys, nobody expects you to think differently. This crass dismissal off the issue with a strawman isn't right.
  - kokada 2y ago
    I don't get this argument. It is clear that if it wasn't for DetSys making a better installer, we wouldn't have one, period. And now there is some movement from NixOS to bring the new installer as a replacement of the old one: https://github.com/NixOS/experimental-nix-installer https://github.com/NixOS/experimental-nix-installer. It doesn't seem that Eelco or anyone in CppNix is actively trying to sabotage the improvement in the installer, but they simple don't care enough to improve the situation (that is fair enough, I assume most in the core team use NixOS).

nothrabannosir 2y ago

Is that a fair comparison? FTA: > Even if you can (ideally) pull a path from a cache instead of building it, you still have to pay Nix’s evaluation tax in determining the derivation’s store path in the first place. [...] Fortunately, FlakeHub now offers an elegant solution to this problem: resolved store paths. If I may paraphrase: > [fundamental problem with Nix] -> [proprietary solution]. Cachix and nixbuild feel like they're solving something at a different layer. They fit into the existing Nix ecosystem (binary cache, builders) and just provide a hosted version of an existing concept. They don't change anything fundamental about Nix. Maybe a better comparison would be devenv?

_cenw 2y ago
I don't object to the product, I object to DetSys moving CppNix into more of an de-facto open core product[1]. This is just a symptom. DetSys contributes the majority of the code that actually gets prioritized and merged (because the maintainer is a DetSys employee), but asking them to build better caching mechanisms into CppNix (which, to be clear, I never asked, that's just Luc's strawman of me) instead of their proprietary product is suddenly "asking Eelco to work for free". [1]: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/announcing-determinate-nix/54709/ https://discourse.nixos.org/t/announcing-determinate-nix/547...