-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
flake check: Ignore more attributes + doc #8332
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
name == "lib" | ||
|| name == "configurations" | ||
|| name == "darwinConfigurations" | ||
|| name == "darwinModules" | ||
|| name == "debug" | ||
|| name == "flakeModule" | ||
|| name == "flakeModules" | ||
|| name == "herculesCI" | ||
|| name == "homeConfigurations" | ||
|| name == "internals" | ||
|| name == "modules" | ||
|| name == "nixopsConfigurations" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hold on guys, are we now adding not only nixpkgs specific code to nix but also random flakes specific code? 👎
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
configurations
and modules
are for #6257. I don't suppose those are a problem?
Do you mean debug
and internals
? I think ignoring those is useful for any flake that wants to be easy to troubleshoot.
These changes are quite intentional and not random or specific to any flake?
If you mean that we shouldn't add code specific to the flakes feature, I can agree with that. It would be nice to separate that out, but I don't think that's a particularly productive choice of component to spin off. I'd rather do that with the dev shell logic, a component whose independent development would pay off more, and where it would make sense to have pinnable or alternate implementations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I meant the old ones.
configurations
and modules
are fine but don't solve anything
instead of internals
and debug
maybe it would be nice to keep a single attribute since both of them generally are going to be used for the same thing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like the separation. For instance, internals
could be used in a shebang script, whereas debug
is only for human consumption and therefore can be assumed that messing around with it is ok.
Using debug
from a shebang script seems like a bad idea, but debugging using internals
isn't quite as bad. I suppose internals.debug
could be a convention, but the indirection is unnecessary and a bit annoying when you're using it in the repl. So internals
is definitely the one to keep, but debug
is also worth the tiny cost.
Sharing what I said in a chat: I think it'd be good progress though, that [this] PR |
A helper for module system applications. Naming compatible with NixOS/nix#6257 To be supported by nix flake check in NixOS/nix#8332 Concept is in the spirit of a proposed module based solution to [RFC 0078 System-agnostic configuration file generators](NixOS/rfcs#78).
Motivation
Context
modules
andconfiguration
: Replace 'configurationsXyz' and 'modulesXyz' with 'configurations.xyz' and 'modules.xyz' #6257Checklist for maintainers
Maintainers: tick if completed or explain if not relevant
tests/**.sh
src/*/tests
tests/nixos/*
Priorities
Add 👍 to pull requests you find important.