• parens
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The article clearly states otherwise

    Flakes also are a symptom or cause of much intra-community strife between “pro-flakes” and “anti-flakes” factions

    • null@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Oh, that’s easy – that’s utter bullshit. Article is generous, this is a blog post.

      • parens
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        😂 why do you believe that?

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Because I’m pretty active in the Nix community and have never seen a single anti-flakes comment anywhere. Plenty of people advocating for flakes, and those who don’t use or understand flakes. But never anyone who actively dislikes them.

          • parens
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            OK, I see where you’re coming from. You’re interpreting “anti” as “dislike”. Have you considered interpreting it as those who don’t use and don’t want to use flakes?

            Just because there is disagreement, doesn’t mean that it has to be tied to negative emotions like hate or dislike.

            • null@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Well no, because that’s not what “anti” means.

              And one can absolutely use NixOS without using flakes, whether they’re marked experimental or not. They’re simply a way to make inputs declarative, rather than the nix-channel method which is imperative.

              So there’s no “disagreement” here either.