Consider to avoid adding library dependencies from frenck

@petro Correct, I think you accurately exaggerate the emotions involved. :smile:

I think the emotion involved is mainly from the NixOS project in that case; As for me there is not much emotion to it and a simple request:

Please remove my packages from your project.

Thanks in advance :+1:

…/Frenck

1 Like

Then what’s the point? Just do as he asks. From an outside standpoint, it seems like he’s being reasonable…

Shall I explain? I will try. I’m really trying to moderate and generate mutual understanding.

The nix community is not convinced to remove the package instructions so nobody will probably bother to prepare a PR and merge it.

There is nobody who can make that call, decision making is completely decentral.

So while a formal request might be heard it is not very likely that it will be acted upon.

This is why I expressed that the only solution is mutual understanding. (And maybe also the best solution.)


I’m pretty sure ther are legit stakeholder interests on both sides. We should bother to uncover them.

While I’m inclined to agree with you, the way that OP is handling this is poor to say the least.

3 Likes

Emotions, and I apologize on behalf of the incendiary parts… After cooling off, all parties will see things differently.

1 Like

as people may think your distribution is supported, but isn’t.

Why should they think that? NixOS is not advertising anywhere that it is an official redistribution method and receives upstream support. Home Assistant is also not advertising anywhere that NixOS is an official supported method to install it. If something is broken then people should first contact NixOS and if the maintainers come to the conclusion that it is not a packaging bug caused by NixOS and the issue is relevant to other users an upstream issue/patch is created. NixOS is a distribution mainly targeted at developers right now and are expected to debug such issues without any extra help.

That applies to the Home Assistant project repackaged there as well. It isn’t supported by the Home Assistant project. Users should avoid that.

I can understand that from your support point that you don’t want to deal with those questions but I for myself I rather deal with the extra packaging burden than maintaining a piece of software through pip installs which are not reproducible and don’t integrate well with NixOS.

Additionally, the reasoning provided that it is needed to distribute a Home Assistant package for your distribution is incorrect. A lot of dependencies are not distributed, so that doesn’t make sense.

It is distributed very similar to all other packages on NixOS which are a bit special compared to other distros and most of the work is dealt by NixOS maintainers. NixOS does not contain all packages yet but it is being worked on including all because some extra meta data is required to package them correct because just doing pip install does not work for NixOS.

Just do as he asks. From an outside standpoint, it seems like he’s being reasonable…

NixOS is a very different OS compared to many other Linux OS’s. You cannot just do pip install and things work. The easiest way to get a python package working is to create a package definition and upstream it if you like. The NixOS project accepts both open source licensed and unfree packages but open source ones are always preferred. An alternative would be to use a Docker Image but many people including me don’t like that for various reasons I will not dig into now.

Sure, we can remove the package definitions but this will most likely just fork home-assistant into another repo from where it is very easy to integrate into NixOS.

Also from a legal standpoint NixOS is allowed to distribute the packages as they are all licensed under MIT and though allows us to modify them in any way as long as we preserve credit and the license.

I think than rather to go lost in the nitty gritty details right away, we should state the needs.

@frenck You say “please remove”, what goals (for yourselve or others) do you want to achieve?

(It will make things a lot easier to allow us to see what you see with our own eyes)

Please respect my wishes to remove my packages from your index.

Thank you in advance.

:+1:

I want to achieve my packages are removed from your index.

It would be nice if you could honor my wishes.

Thanks in advance :+1:

…/Frenck

I wished we could do so based on mutual understanding. :+1:

I don’t think we should legitimize any decisions solely based on any person’s role.

(I also think given how nix community works that would be against our principles)

Sorry to hear you don’t respect requests from authors who wrote the source you rely on, the author that has put in the effort to create it in the first place.

Always good to know a project doesn’t care.

Nevertheless, my requests will remain the same, please remove my packages from the NixOS package index.

Thanks in advance.

…/Frenck

Indeed, we have no clear policy for this and there are different opinions. So the outcome is still unclear.

I consider most strive for good working relationships with upstream and I am absolutely sure, many would wish you gave us another chance. :smile:

I’m really sorry how this went along.

Please leave us some time for our (slow) distributed decision making processes.

If you agree to provide more background on what motivates you, we all, as humans will have an easier time to connect with your reasons.

Maybe the conclusion will be “remove”. Who knows? (And a bit it’s also in your hands)

Then it shouldn’t have been merged and handled like that.

It made me decide to request for complete removal. I suggest you honor that request and sit on your wounds. I’m not an emotional type, but a rational type. My response will remain the same next week; please remove it.

Thanks in advance.

…/Frenck

(I also think given how nix community works that would be against our principles)

I was promted to rectify: there are also persons who put priority on political concessions. It’s hard to make sense of the nix community. It’s too diverse and you put a real (and interesting) challenge on our (“curious”) decision making processes.

I’m sure you understand with the context I’ve given that there is no “you” that you could reasonably address.

If I can help in any way to further mutual understanding, let me know. For now I think that’s all I can offer, but at least I can offer that.

And it seems like I care :smile:

If I can further that, I’ll be your agent…

(I can’t continue this conversation since I’ve reached the maximum number of replies for the first day.)

Thanks. Now, if you could just please remove the packages as requested? Thank you!

…/Frenck

Closing topic.

Original poster had no intention to contribute anything positively.

Nix closes issues on their repository to force issue here, but it’s not our issue. They do things that are unsupported and are running into issues. That’s why it’s unsupported.

We actively reduce the scope of what we support to reduce maintenance burden. We’re not interested in user requirements prevailing at the cost of our maintainers. Our current supported options support all common use cases and we’re not going to expand this at this point.

7 Likes