rfcs VS nixpacks

https://www.tweag.io/blog/2020-09-10-nix-cas/ https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/62 https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/17 https://github.com/tweag/rfcs/blob/cas-rfc/rfcs/0062-content-addressed-paths.md https://github.com/wmertens/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0017-intensional-store.md https://discourse.nixos.org/t/content-addressed-nix-call-for-testers/12881

Actually the cache isn't that important, most binaries get rebuilt quite often due to their dependencies changing.

Although it is my hope that rfc 17 eventually makes it through: https://github.com/wmertens/rfcs/blob/master/rfcs/0017-inten...

Example with Nixpacks:

We have an upcoming nixpacks builder that should work on ARM/ARM64, but there are issues in the nixpacks codebase I'm still trying to sort out before that lands.

I think this is something the writer of the article would be delighted to find: https://github.com/railwayapp/nixpacks

Yes, it builds the Dockerfile if it exists otherwise it uses nixpacks to create an image from source files for any language/framework. This image is then run using docker run .

I think this is true for Nix in the deployment/ops space, where debugging a broken build can be very frustrating. Language improvements are going to be less useful for app developers, the Flake learning curve is not going to get better with a type system.

Perhaps something like heroku buildpaks (https://github.com/railwayapp/nixpacks ?) would help devs get on the Nix train.

Hey! Any plans on integrating nixpacks? I'm one of the core maintainers & would love to help you out. No worries if not.

Uses NixPacks to build the images;