Proposal: merge `packages` and `settings` submodules
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
enhancement
- Dominant language
- Nix
- Stars
- 240
- Forks
- 27
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Instead of separate packages.<name>.* and settings.<name>.*, why not have a single submodule namespace? Isn't that simpler DX?
viz.: Instead of doing:
{
packages = {
aeson.source = "1.5.0";
myhaskell.source = ./haskell;
};
settings = {
hello_rust.custom =self'.packages.hello_rust;
myhaskell.libraryProfiling = true;
};
}
why not just:
{
packages = {
hello_rust.source = self'.packages.hello_rust
myhaskell.source = ./haskell;
myhaskell.setting.libraryProfiling = true;
aeson.source = "1.5.0";
};
}
?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the linked Zulip discussion and locating how the current packages and settings submodules are defined; the issue names no files or tests. Done would mean evaluating whether one packages namespace can support both source declarations and nested settings without the separate settings namespace.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- build-system
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100