Our great sponsors
nix-gui | rfcs | |
---|---|---|
29 | 51 | |
638 | 488 | |
2.5% | 5.5% | |
0.0 | 5.0 | |
over 1 year ago | 6 days ago | |
Python | ||
MIT License | Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
nix-gui
- System settings that aren’t in System Settings
-
AI roasts NixOS users
This is pretty close https://github.com/nix-gui/nix-gui
-
Which newer, up and coming distros do you think will make it?
Nix based aiming at beginners. If it combines/works with https://github.com/nix-gui/nix-gui, then an amazing distro may be created. It would be user friendly, but also extremely powerful, allowing basically everything to be configured via the gui. Both softwares are alpha state, but I am excited to see what they bring.
-
Using NixOS on corporate laptops.
Maybe https://github.com/nix-gui/nix-gui? I dunno if it can do userspace config though.
-
Nix Software Center: gtk4/libadwaita app store for NixOS
Would it make sense to integrate something like nix gui into this?
-
NixOS Configuration Editor: A gtk4/libadwaita app to edit and manage basic configurations without (much) coding
I remember when I first started using NixOS, as a confused beginner I tried to find a graphical application to manage and edit my configuration. I stumbled upon Nix-Gui, however, I didn’t really like the look, it crashed a fair amount, and I never really figured out how to use it. That said, their idea and all of the hard work they put into their project inspired me to make a similar application that focuses more on simplicity and ease of use.
-
NIX GUI application to manage nixos build with graphical ui.
I was wondering if you are aware of https://github.com/nix-gui/nix-gui and how your tool compares to it
-
Is flatpak really the future?
There is also a GUI in development, hopefully it will help casual users in the future.
-
How do I contribute to NixOS?
There's https://github.com/nix-gui/nix-gui for a gui like experience.
-
NixOS History and Our Experience - Nix, Null, Nada, Nothing
Configuration language usage: Probably a major win for programmers, but a major negative for non-programmers. However, nix-gui has shown that there's potential for gui-based nixos configuration. And this might one day be extended to use as part of the graphical installer. https://discourse.nixos.org/t/why-is-there-no-installer-for-nixos/16644/21. Since nix can be serialized and deserialized to json, there's actually a fair amount of interoperability able to be done to manipulate nix configuration using existing libraries.
rfcs
-
Nix: The Breaking Point
You may consider this view biased, but we have this: https://srid.ca/nixos-mod
* September 2023: The "Nix Community Survey 2023" is looking for gender data, and the mods don't like that most contributors are men.
* November 2023: The moderation team tries to institute a Code of Conduct https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/114 ... and they get their way
* November 2023: Some are not happy about it: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/moderation-team-accountability... -- the moderators talk about their "authority" and of course lock and hide the thread. It's "disruptive" and "off-topic", you see.
* This sort of activity continues -- moderators consolidating and increasing their power, citing how they need the power to control "concern trolls" and such -- and now in April 2024, we get https://save-nix-together.org/
The "anonymous contributors" want to drive out the NixOS founder entirely, so that _they_ are in charge. They want "to hold people accountable for bad behaviour at all levels" and lament having "responsibility without authority" - in other words, they want power, power, power. They want power over everyone. Their justification is that they believe they have the moral high ground, and they deserve to lord it over everyone else.
Hold onto that hard power, Eelco, and tell this lot to fork the project. Let's see how they enjoy moderating noxious.org instead of nixos.org
-
What Nix Will Have Been
https://old.reddit.com/r/NixOS/comments/1ceiz36/thoughts_on_...
And the RFC to improve the situation:
https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/175
-
Eelco Dolstra's leadership is corrosive to the Nix project
> (after eelco ignored the PR for quite a while, also!)
Clicking that link takes us to a PR that was opened on 2024-02-02. The initial response from the Nix author comes 7 minutes later. Puck has multiple back and forths with other members Github, but her next interaction with the Nix author comes the next day on 2024-02-03. This is also the first time in the conversation where she "reminds him ... to even read her PR message". There's a second interaction later that same day during which she does similar, but it's worth noting this is pointing to a different message and appears to be less a "reminder to read" and more re-iterating what they feel is their argument against the Nix author's own arguments. Puck then continues to have back and forth with other commenters but as of today, there has been no further comments from the Nix author after 2024-02-03, and no further comments from Puck after 2024-02-08.
This hardly to my mind qualifies either as "having to remind him multiple times to even read her PR message at all" or "after eelco ignored the PR for quite a while, also!" So as I said it's a fairly weak claim, and feels more like a "bastard eating crackers" reaction to the PR than an actual showing of poor behavior.
As for the "Meson example", I didn't ignore it. As I stated in my comment, I had at that point read two of the referenced discussions in detail, and thus commented on them. I didn't comment in the "Meson example" for the simple reason that I hadn't read it.
I have read it now, and equally find it confusing.
1) The claim in the letter is that the proposal has "passed RFC, for five years", yet the RFC itself only appears to have been opened 2022-08-24. It's been a while since grade school for me, and I'll admit COVID has warped all our sense of time, but I'm pretty sure 2022 is not 5 years ago.
2) The first completed working implementation of the change doesn't appear to have been done until 2023-01-18 (https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/132#issuecomment-13874661...). Again this is much less than 5 years old.
3) On 2023-03-20, the author of the PR for this change states:
> the RFC has made it past most of the early stages and the current goal is to achieve parity with the current buildsystem before replacing it.
(https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/132#issuecomment-14768433...)
Again, this doesn't seem to fit at all with the claim that the proposal has "passed RFC, for five years"
4) On 2023-11-01, the Nix author themselves asks for updates on the RFC implementation, an action which doesn't seem congruent with someone who is willy nilly single handedly blocking things and being a disruption to the process. And the author of the PR states:
>the main block is actually a lack of free time for the main devs!
(https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/132#issuecomment-17890770...)
This doesn't seem to point to evidence that the Nix author is single handedly holding up this process.
5) On 2024-03-21 the PR author notes:
> currently working on adding support to build nix-perl, waiting for assistance
(https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/132#issuecomment-20135356...)
Not to sound like a broken record, but if the issue isn't finished as of a few weeks ago, it can hardly be considered to be held up by the Nix author for 5 years.
I agree that one of the links in the open letter is to a comment on a PR from 2019, which is indeed 5 year ago, and does indeed contain the Nix author commenting that they are skeptical of the change because "he doesn't know meson but knows his own build system". But given that there's an entire wealth of history on the topic since then, including progress on the feature that appears completely unobstructed by the Nix author and an open PR that is a mere 3 weeks old for a current implementation, I find myself again unconvinced of this rampant bad behavior on the part of the Nix author. And I reiterate again that these complaints are very weak and don't do much to support the open letter at best, and act as contrary evidence at worst.
Again there might be other context to be had that is missing, but if one is going to write a massive "open letter" complaining about bad behavior, I expect the links in that letter to point to actual bad behavior, and or provide the relevant context necessary to show how what appears to be normal dissent is a passive aggressive continuation of obstruction. I have to assume the links one provides in an open letter is their strongest evidence, and if this is all the authors have... I am unconvinced.
-
Build System Schism: The Curse of Meta Build Systems
Nix with dynamic derivations (RFC92) could potentially beat this curse.
https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0092-plan-dyn...
-
Show HN: Flox 1.0 – Open-source dev env as code with Nix
See: A plan to stabilize the new CLI and Flakes incrementally https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/136
- RSS can be used to distribute all sorts of information
-
I like gentoo's package deprecation process
NixOS recently introduced "problem" infrastructure to deal with such problems more gracefully and explicitly:
https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0127-issues-w...
-
NixOS and Flakes Book: An unofficial book for beginners (free)
For some more context: Flawed as they are, Flakes solve a large number of problems Nix experiences without them. This is why I, and presumably many others, use them even in their current experimental state.
An RFC was recently accepted to commit to forming a plan towards stabilization of Flakes: https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/136
Personally, I don't believe there won't be any breaking changes, but I also believe that the stabilization of Flakes is still a ways away and hope that there will be a reasonable migration path.
- NixOS RFC 136 approved: A plan to stabilize the new CLI and Flakes incrementally
- NixOS RFC 136 accepted: A plan to stabilize the new CLI and Flakes incrementally
What are some alternatives?
flatpak - Linux application sandboxing and distribution framework
nix-ros-overlay - ROS overlay for the Nix package manager
xdg-desktop-portal-gtk - Gtk implementation of xdg-desktop-portal
not-os - An operating system generator, based on NixOS, that, given a config, outputs a small (47 MB), read-only squashfs for a runit-based operating system, with support for iPXE and signed boot.
nixos-hardware - A collection of NixOS modules covering hardware quirks.
nixpkgs - Nix Packages collection & NixOS
dhall-lang - Maintainable configuration files
nix - Nix, the purely functional package manager
nonguix - Nonguix mirror – pull requests ignored, please use upstream for that
spack - A flexible package manager that supports multiple versions, configurations, platforms, and compilers.
nickel - Better configuration for less
emacs-overlay - Bleeding edge emacs overlay [maintainer=@adisbladis]