Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
On 03/08/2017 07:20 PM, David Izquierdo wrote: > Pretty similar to how nixpkgs git -> Hydra -> cache works, with an > additional testing phase. To be clear, we do have quite a few nixos tests running on Hydra, and the nixos channels won't update if some of the "critical ones" fail. (Still, SUSE's testing is more thorough IIRC.) --Vladimir smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
I think It could be worthwhile to look at openSUSE's Tumbleweed setup for rolling releases. They use openQA for automatic testing of every package in the distribution, and then release the binaries as snapshots for users to update. Pretty similar to how nixpkgs git -> Hydra -> cache works, with an additional testing phase. I _think_ they provide it hosted, and if it's similar to OBS, they actively encourage community members and distros to use their infrastructure. https://openqa.opensuse.org/ On 06/03/17 12:24, Kevin Cox wrote: On 06/03/17 06:54, Sander wrote: Moving a symlink twice a year? Good point. I guess it would be worth trying out and we can see how many people use this. I was thinking something more rolling would be nice too. Like a lightly tested. Although that would definitely have more maintenance costs. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
On 17-03-06 04:03pm, Domen Kožar wrote: > It's something like 15min of work to parse http://nixos.org/channels/ and > point to the latest channel if someone needs this. > > Officially this is a very bad idea, since people will want us to support it. Also ignoring the idea behind stable upgrades, that breaking changes are almost guaranteed. -- Proudly written in Mutt with Vim on NixOS. Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es May take up to five days to read your message. If it’s urgent, call me. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
zimbatm wrote (ao): > At the moment we don't provide a strong guarantee that release > upgrades will be 100% backward-compatible. Having a "stable" channel > that jumps between releases would be misleading I think. With Debian one can choose a specific [1]release (Wheezy, Jessie, Stretch, Sid (roling release)), or old-stable (Wheezy), stable (Jessie, will become old-stable)), testing (Stretch, will become stable), experimental and unstable (Sid, always unstable). old-stable, stable, etc, are just symlinks. Linux all about choice. And Debian does not guarantee anything either. You get to keep the pieces though. I would like to pin my server to 'nixos-stable', just as my laptop is on 'nixos-unstable' (mostly because of wayland). Sander 1. ftp://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/dists/ ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
At the moment we don't provide a strong guarantee that release upgrades will be 100% backward-compatible. Having a "stable" channel that jumps between releases would be misleading I think. On Mon, 6 Mar 2017, 15:07 Linus Heckemann, wrote: > On 06/03/17 15:03, Domen Kožar wrote: > > It's something like 15min of work to parse http://nixos.org/channels/ > > and point to the latest channel if someone needs this. > > > > Officially this is a very bad idea, since people will want us to > > support it. > > Isn't the point to just have it refer to the version of NixOS that *is* > being supported? I don't see how parsing http://nixos.org/channels will > convey that information — 17.03 has existed for longer than it's been > supported, no? I.e. stable rather than latest. > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
On 06/03/17 15:03, Domen Kožar wrote: > It's something like 15min of work to parse http://nixos.org/channels/ > and point to the latest channel if someone needs this. > > Officially this is a very bad idea, since people will want us to > support it. Isn't the point to just have it refer to the version of NixOS that *is* being supported? I don't see how parsing http://nixos.org/channels will convey that information — 17.03 has existed for longer than it's been supported, no? I.e. stable rather than latest. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
It's something like 15min of work to parse http://nixos.org/channels/ and point to the latest channel if someone needs this. Officially this is a very bad idea, since people will want us to support it. On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kevin Cox wrote: > On 06/03/17 06:54, Sander wrote: > >> Moving a symlink twice a year? >> > Good point. I guess it would be worth trying out and we can see how many > people use this. > > I was thinking something more rolling would be nice too. Like a lightly > tested. Although that would definitely have more maintenance costs. > > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
On 06/03/17 06:54, Sander wrote: Moving a symlink twice a year? Good point. I guess it would be worth trying out and we can see how many people use this. I was thinking something more rolling would be nice too. Like a lightly tested. Although that would definitely have more maintenance costs. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
Kevin Cox wrote (ao): > On Mar 5, 2017 19:26, "Bjørn Forsman" wrote: > > As long as the nixos-stable channel is an opt-in, why not? > > Well there would be a maintenance overhead. Moving a symlink twice a year? Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
On Mar 5, 2017 19:26, "Bjørn Forsman" wrote: As long as the nixos-stable channel is an opt-in, why not? Well there would be a maintenance overhead. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
David Izquierdo writes: > I think it would be handy though. After all, this is NixOS we're talking > about. We already have system.stateVersion for protecting stateful data, > and fixing the rest of the system is only a rollback away. Why not make > the alias/symlink without making it the default? Another option I've wanted to explore, is dropping warnings on old channels. See: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/22096 A nice benefit to this option is we can retroactively apply it to all channels. Graham ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
On 5 March 2017 at 20:22, Kevin Cox wrote: > Oops, forgot to include the list. > > On Mar 5, 2017 16:15, "Sander" wrote: > > Graham Christensen wrote (ao): >> NixOS 17.03 has entered Beta. This means we now have 3 versions of NixOS >> being developed: >> >> - 16.09 (stable) >> - 17.03 (beta) >> - unstable > > Would it make sense to have a 'nixos-stable' channel that points to > whatever channel is stable? > > It's kinda a weird concept, as there would be breaking changes whenever it > switched between releases but I do see the use of a more tested stream then > nixos-unstable. Maybe it would be a channel with breaking changes but "no" > broken packages? > > I would love to hear what people think about this. As long as the nixos-stable channel is an opt-in, why not? Best regards, Bjørn Forsman ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
Oops, forgot to include the list. On Mar 5, 2017 16:15, "Sander" wrote: Graham Christensen wrote (ao): > NixOS 17.03 has entered Beta. This means we now have 3 versions of NixOS > being developed: > > - 16.09 (stable) > - 17.03 (beta) > - unstable Would it make sense to have a 'nixos-stable' channel that points to whatever channel is stable? It's kinda a weird concept, as there would be breaking changes whenever it switched between releases but I do see the use of a more tested stream then nixos-unstable. Maybe it would be a channel with breaking changes but "no" broken packages? I would love to hear what people think about this. ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel?
I think it would be handy though. After all, this is NixOS we're talking about. We already have system.stateVersion for protecting stateful data, and fixing the rest of the system is only a rollback away. Why not make the alias/symlink without making it the default? On 05/03/17 19:37, Nathan Bijnens wrote: I think that's dangerous. You will be upgrading without being aware of any breaking changes. N. On Sun, Mar 5, 2017, 17:15 Sander wrote: Graham Christensen wrote (ao): NixOS 17.03 has entered Beta. This means we now have 3 versions of NixOS being developed: - 16.09 (stable) - 17.03 (beta) - unstable Would it make sense to have a 'nixos-stable' channel that points to whatever channel is stable? Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
Re: [Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
I think that's dangerous. You will be upgrading without being aware of any breaking changes. N. On Sun, Mar 5, 2017, 17:15 Sander wrote: > Graham Christensen wrote (ao): > > NixOS 17.03 has entered Beta. This means we now have 3 versions of NixOS > > being developed: > > > > - 16.09 (stable) > > - 17.03 (beta) > > - unstable > > Would it make sense to have a 'nixos-stable' channel that points to > whatever channel is stable? > > Sander > ___ > nix-dev mailing list > nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
[Nix-dev] 'nixos-stable' channel? (was: Re: NixOS 17.03 Beta, 16.09 Security Support Timeline)
Graham Christensen wrote (ao): > NixOS 17.03 has entered Beta. This means we now have 3 versions of NixOS > being developed: > > - 16.09 (stable) > - 17.03 (beta) > - unstable Would it make sense to have a 'nixos-stable' channel that points to whatever channel is stable? Sander ___ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev