[HN Gopher] Contributing Scrutiny to Nixpkgs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Contributing Scrutiny to Nixpkgs
        
       Author : jnsgruk
       Score  : 63 points
       Date   : 2024-02-24 08:39 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (jnsgr.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (jnsgr.uk)
        
       | kevincox wrote:
       | nixpkgs is a funny situation where it is incredibly easy to just
       | run with patches and additions locally. It is often easier to
       | make a service config just for you than something reusable and
       | broadly useful.
       | 
       | Thankfully the upstream contribution process is also pretty easy.
       | So it seems like a lot does make it upstream.
        
         | yorwba wrote:
         | It's easy to open a PR, but not so easy to get someone to
         | actually review it.
         | 
         | There's currently 165 open PRs by first-time contributors
         | adding a new package, some of which have been just sitting
         | there without review comments for years.
         | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3A%22...
         | 
         | At least they're meticulously labeled so it's easy to find
         | them.
        
           | jacoblambda wrote:
           | Yeah if your PR isn't getting the attention it needs, you
           | probably just need to go to the discourse forum and post a
           | request in the appropriate thread. There's one for PRs that
           | need a review and one for PRs that have been reviewed but are
           | pending a final check and merge by maintainers.
           | 
           | https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032
           | 
           | https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-already-reviewed/2617
           | 
           | IMHO there could be clearer guidance regarding this but as it
           | is it's not terribly difficult to find and it works well
           | enough.
        
             | yorwba wrote:
             | I suspect the reason that posting on Discourse works is
             | _because_ this advice is not universally followed, so the
             | workload is reduced relative to reviewing all open PRs. In
             | other words, it 's a way to distribute limited grease to
             | only the squeakiest wheels, not to grease everything
             | better.
             | 
             | But maybe I'm wrong and simply posting one of the 165 PRs
             | per day to Discourse would be enough to clear that
             | particular backlog in less than a year.
        
             | ris wrote:
             | There's also https://matrix.to/#/#review-requests:nixos.org
        
             | quag wrote:
             | While trying to get reviews, I posted on a forum a few
             | times (I think it was this one). Got a little traction, got
             | great advice and updated the patches. Sadly I hit the
             | forum's new user posting limits and was unable to get the
             | reviews to give the final approval. So I've had some
             | patches accepted and others that have been sitting there
             | for months/years.
             | 
             | It has meant that after a burst of packaging, I've stopped
             | submitting. I'd love to be able to get reviews even if it
             | takes months. Any suggestions are welcome.
        
               | zimbatm wrote:
               | Try to come on Matrix; you'll be able to get much better
               | traction there.
               | 
               | Some community members are also working on a merge-bot[1]
               | with the goal of allowing package maintainers to self-
               | service their PRs. This will allow nixpkgs to scale much
               | better. For now, it's limited to package upgrades
               | submitted by the ryantm-updater bot.
               | 
               | [1]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs-merge-bot
        
           | ydlr wrote:
           | That is not too bad, considering there are about 90000
           | packages in nixpks now.
        
           | jnsgruk wrote:
           | I've ended up with a small but excellent network of folks I
           | reach out to on Mastodon who usually help me out with
           | reviews.
           | 
           | Most of the maintainers I've interacted with are open to a
           | ping so long as you're not hounding them.
           | 
           | I've also found posting the PR on Mastodon with the #NixOS
           | tag has been helpful for attracting attention.
        
         | Jhsto wrote:
         | In a perfect world some of the development could happen in nix-
         | community repos which are usually a bit more topic specific.
         | The packages and modules would "move up" to nixpkgs on tag
         | releases. This is how I initially thought the repos work
         | anyway, but now I see that most of them just live as overlays
         | and never quite sync up with the main repo.
        
         | hamandcheese wrote:
         | On this topic - I think nixpkgs could really use some tooling
         | to delegate merge permissions (mediated by a bot, probably) to
         | more folks for less critical areas.
         | 
         | Nixpkgs needs more maintainers with commit permissions, but for
         | a project as important as nixpkgs its hard to vet enough
         | people.
        
       | k8svet wrote:
       | This is exceptional content. I'll be linking this frequently when
       | I help users on Discourse and encourage them to become
       | contributors.
       | 
       | Going to subscribe to RSS and everything. So good, thank you.
        
         | jnsgruk wrote:
         | Author here, stoked you liked it! Thanks for the comment!
        
       | SkyMarshal wrote:
       | You should post this on the subreddit/s too: /r/Nix, /r/NixOS
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-24 23:01 UTC)