[Nix-dev] Re: new possible movement to git (?)

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi!

Eelco Dolstra <e.dolstra at tudelft.nl> skribis:

> So it would be nice if we had a more stable tree that users can update
> from safely.  For example, we could have these Nixpkgs/NixOS
> trees/branches:
>
> - An "unstable" tree which receives developer commits.  It might be in
> a broken state, so end users shouldn't use it.  Hydra continuously
> builds it.  Of course, complicated changes should be done in a feature
> tree/branch and pulled in when they're done.
>
> - A "tested" tree that automatically gets updated from the "unstable"
> tree when some set of Nixpkgs and NixOS tests succeed *and* the
> Nixpkgs channel is up to date.  This tree should be fairly safe to
> use.
>
> - A "stable" tree that gets updated manually and conservatively (e.g.,
> only security or stability updates).
>
> Does this sound reasonable?

Sounds like a great idea.

Automatic migration from ‘unstable’ to ‘tested’ may be tricky to
implement, but it would be really nice (this reminds me of ‘tla-pqm’, an
automatic patch queue manager [0].)

[...]

> Random point: should the NixOS and Nixpkgs trees be in the same
> repository?  I think so, since it allows them to be updated
> atomically, which is important given that Nixpkgs and NixOS changes
> are often related.

Agreed.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

[0] http://wiki.bazaar.canonical.com/PatchQueueManager