[grhmc]

I just posted a reply on Discourse (https://discourse.nixos.org/t/introducing-flakehub/32044/14?...) but for posterity:

I’m sorry some folks aren’t excited about FlakeHub, but that is okay. We’ve made it because it solves real problems we’ve experienced, and I think it is going to make a big difference in the community. We’re all contributing to the project in the ways we want to, and this is an example of that.

We see flakes as the future of Nix, and we’re unabashedly working to make that true. One way we’re doing that is using flakes extensively every day and exposing ourselves to the bugs, papercuts, and pain points. We often deeply research and resolve these problems upstream, without fanfare or posting on Discourse.

I think we have the common goal of growing and improving Nix, and we’re glad to be doing it together. We would love to see a continuation of RFC-144 accepted into Nix upstream. The version resolving feature of FlakeHub is a bandaid that works until the upstream project has a comparable feature. In my opinion, it is a good thing to do experiments like this without committing the entire project to it.

[zamalek]

As flawed as flakes are, they are significantly better than channels and all the hacks that surround them. Flakes are how I manage my system today and I honestly believe that there is no harm in building tooling around them - we all know that things are subject to change. This is now in my configs: https://codeberg.org/jcdickinson/nix/src/branch/main/flake.n...

Something I've noticed: `nixos/*` and `home-manager/*` are incompatible (home-manager expects 23.11 while nixos is 23.05).

[grhmc]

Very cool!

You can get nixpkgs unstable like this:

    nixpkgs-unstable.url = "https://flakehub.com/f/NixOS/nixpkgs/1.*.tar.gz";