Nixpkgs committers interest list #321665
Comments
Mic92
added
9.needs: community feedback
and removed
0.kind: bug
|
I want to nominate @emilazy, who recently carried the OpenSSH SIGALARM vulnerability across all branches and even wrote an advisory and took the time to answer questions and construct a timeline. Emily has 75 merged PRs and over 100 reviewed PRs. She has been contributing on and off since 2019, and contributed for example the initrd OpenSSH migration. I think it would be beneficial to further enable a capable person like her. |
|
Thank you for the nomination! I’d be happy to accept the commit bit if offered. I’ve frequently had long absences from FOSS work in the past several years, so I can’t guarantee availability, but I’d like to be able to contribute more consistently going forward. In the wider ecosystem I’m also a nix-darwin committer so I’m reasonably familiar with the module system, and I helped nix-darwin and Home Manager migrate from the old DocBook documentation toolchain to unblock its removal from Nixpkgs. The biggest thing I’ve done recently was working on removing Mesa as a channel blocker on Darwin, which had caused significant issues and friction in the past. I’m a user of both macOS and Linux and would like to continue to help bridge the gap between the two platforms in terms of maintenance and quality. |
|
I’d like to apply for the commit bit (and also happy to wait if that makes more sense.) My first contribution and introduction to Nix was in 2021-2022, to upstream to QEMU an old patchset to enable 9pfs on Darwin, thus allowing for fixing up remote file support on QEMU and thus lima and podman on Mac, with many thanks to @alyssais and @domenkozar in guiding me through all that: #122420 Since then, I’ve added a couple smaller packages and fixed up others to work better on Mac. My focuses are around GIS software on Mac (my longstanding white whale is to get QGIS working on Mac, which is both close and far: #157862), keeping emscripten up to date (usually some LLVM tip of tree backports with the help of @RaitoBezarius), Clojure stuff, the occasional dabbling in random JS or Perl packages here and there, and fixing broken things on Mac. I’ve been a little quieter the last year as work focuses pulled me a bit away from programming, but I’m working my way back in to it this summer. I know there’s a perennial need for capacity on Darwin (ie #323144) and that a combo of lack of testing and lack of ability to review or land fixes is a big pain point, and would mostly like to help keep those PRs moving in a timely manner. 58 merged PRs: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pulls?q=sort:updated-desc+is:pr+author:willcohen+is:merged 52 reviews: No NixOS modules yet — I’m still predominantly Mac-centric, though I sometime play with it in a VM. |
You can filter those out with |
I added this condition to the script mentioned in OP. |
|
I like to express my interest in a commit bit, too. I'd like to use my commit bit to help merge already reviewed packages and to reduce the time it takes to merge simple updates. When time permits, I look through the |
|
@emilazy @gador @willcohen Welcome to the team! Sorry for the delay. We (nixpkgs team admins) are currently discussing, where we are moving future applications, but until then we stick to this issue. |
|
I'd like to nominate @philiptaron! They've been super helpful in co-maintaining https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs-check-by-name, but have also been active in Nixpkgs with |
|
I'm interested in committer rights to merge the pull requests of others and update packages I maintain. Notable PRs:
Stats: |
|
I'm interested in commit privileges. I reckon I'm on the low end for existing contributions to nixpkgs so no hard feelings if I just don't have the exposure yet to warrant committing; I think my bid for more responsibility is as much grounded in my record of maintenance across a number of OSS communities (most recently Idris2 and beam-community) as it is in nixpkgs PRs merged thus far. The reason I believe that is relevant is because I know how to show restraint and gradually assert myself in more places as I gain confidence that I know the established precedents. My primary areas of interest in nixpkgs are: The Elixir ecosystem (PRs), Idris2 (PRs), and Darwin (PRs). I also have a vested interest in the Ruby ecosystem, NixOS, and the overall health and success of nixpkgs!
|
|
@philiptaron welcome to the team. |
|
@donovanglover welcome to the team as well. |
|
@mattpolzin Not a reject, but none of us (@jtojnar, @NickCao and me) knows you very well, so we would like to know if there is a person from the community you have interacted with and who can vouch for you? |
|
@Mic92 Sure, that's fair. I'm not sure if any single existing Nixpkgs committer has interacted with me in more than one context so it's quite possible no one would say they know me well (yet). I'd mention @happysalada or @fabianhjr who I think have had positive experiences working with me in the context of Elixir and Idris2 packaging but I definitely won't feel slighted if they don't feel they are ready to vouch for me at this point. I believe the folks maintaining Bruno with me have seen me be responsive, knowledgable, constructive, etc. but last I checked none of us are committers (so no one to suggest vouches for me there). |
|
Can vouch about positive interactions here on nixos and on some idris stuff a while back |
|
Same here, i can vouch for positive interactions. I think the beam maintainers could definitely benefit from having more people. |
|
I'd like to nominate @AndersonTorres. I was surprised that they aren't a commiter already, despite their HUUGE contributions. My personal interactions with them have been very civil and I have learnt a thing or two from them in my novice days (still learning). I was surprised to see they aren't a commiter already. |
|
I too feel that @AndersonTorres is very dedicated, and very motivated - which explains their thorough contributions. However I personally experienced stubborn communication with him (also here), which makes me a bit worried to be fully honest. I deeply appreciate though the PRs that remove the inactive maintainers (see #290642).
They were in the past, and got removed. |
|
I can mirror @doronbehar's opinion but want to add that my interactions with them have not improved significantly since they lost their commit access. I think it'd be better to keep it that way for now. |
|
@mattpolzin based on @happysalada and @fabianhjr's feedback, we have decided to give you nixpkgs commit access. Welcome. |
|
Hello there, I'd like to nominate @felschr. He has 123 authored & closed PRs, 174 reviewed & closed PRs, and he maintains about 18 packages. His main focus is on maintaining Tor Browser & Mullvad Browser. Many of the updates are security critical and it could be good having an active package maintainer who can merge them. He also created the etebase-server NixOS module a while ago and made some smaller improvements to other modules (e.g. cfdyndns, mosquitto, ddclient). I personally had the chance to interact with him on PRs and all the interactions were pretty good and respectful. |
|
I’d like to nominate @tie, if he’s interested. He has been contributing since late 2022, and has recently been doing very high‐quality and in‐depth work covering the spectrum from extensive work on the Node.js package, through a rework of a core Darwin tool switching from an unmaintained fork to a clean set of patches on top of the latest upstream release, to fixes and various enhancements to stdenv. He has also brought his invaluable Bash expertise to reviews of various pull requests, including #318614 and #331560. The raw PR counts may be lower than many new committers, but in my judgement they are of a high standard and frequently high‐effort, and I have found him a pleasure to work with.
|
|
Hi everyone! I'd like to apply for committer access. I've been a member of the NixOS GitHub organization since 2020, and have been active in various parts, like cross-compilation (1, 2), systemd journal remote, NetBox, Jellyfin, etc. |
|
@emilazy, thank you, it’s been a pleasure working with you and @philiptaron as well! I have more computers than I probably need in my homelab, so my focus in NixOS/Nixpkgs/Nix is support for building packages for different platforms (i.e. cross-compilation). I’m mostly contributing in my free time, but we also use NixOS at my current job. I’m not opposed to getting committer access, but I hope I can be of help with stuff I’m familiar with regardless of the commit bit. |
|
Sorry for the delay. It's mostly on my site that we build up a bit of a backlog. |
|
@rhelmot @artemist @hsjobeki welcome to the nixpkgs team. @rhelmot @artemist I assigned you @Ericson2314 as a mentor |
|
Hello, I'd like to register interest for Nixpkgs committer access.
For a little more context: I currently work on Nix packaging at Mercury with @lf- and @Gabriella439. I have also collaborated with @infinisil in my capacity as a Mercury engineer. |
|
I too would like to apply for nixpkgs commit bit. I have been using Nix privately since December 2022 and at work since January 2023, where I maintain a Nix-based CI/CD pipeline for a monorepo. I daily-drive NixOS on my desktop PC and nix-darwin on my Macbook, as well as NixOS on my Raspberry Pi, my own private server and a few servers at work with lots of different services.
I personally love to bring Nix and NixOS closer to new users, as well as help new nixpkgs contributors to reduce any onboarding pains where possible. I'm fairly active on Matrix as well, where I try to help out with any problems concerning Rust or darwin. Other committers that I think I have been interacting with the most are @GaetanLepage, @emilazy, @drupol and @bbigras. I also asked @GaetanLepage if he'd be willing to be my mentor if I'm accepted and he agreed (it wasn't quite clear to me whether we should be looking for mentors ourselves yet, but I figured it wouldn't hurt). If you've interacted with me on Matrix or Discord, you might recognize me from my avatar (which is a photo of Loki, one of our two beloved black cats): |
I fully endorse @niklaskorz 's application to the commit bit. His contributions have been of a very high technical quality. Also, I would be honored to be his mentor. I am sure I can learn at least as many things from him as he can do from me :) |
|
I endorse @9999years's application. Though I disclose the conflict of interest that she is my coworker as noted above (and her receiving the commit bit would make my job easier at work), I've worked with her outside of my current job for years before and can attest to her caring about quality and effective processes and having an impressive drive to make projects as nice to work on as possible (including and especially by saying "no" where it's appropriate). |
|
This issue has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/25-05-call-for-release-manager-editor/59765/8 |
|
Since one privilege of a committer is to merge PRs, I expect to see some amount of review done by people applying for commit access. However, IMHO, the review done by @9999years seems not enough. |
|
Hey everyone, I want to nominate @numinit, who created the Android team. Also he is one of the main contributors to androidenv, who constantly contribute and update the code. It would be great if we have him as a committer so in the Android team we could iterate faster on the features and problems. Thank you! |
|
Thank you for the nomination @hadilq! I have been learning the nixpkgs deep magic with the help of @RossComputerGuy most recently, including help with team creation and figuring out various ARM64 and Darwin issues. My most recent projects are creating a virtual multi-node WiFi testbed and enabling Mattermost's 17000 test suite on Hydra. For the Android team, I hope to add an option to unvendor Google's precompiles of clang and cmake for the NDK, and am working on automatic updates that track Google's latest repos. Obligatory stats:
|
|
I would like to nominate myself as a committer. It has been about 1 year since I submitted my first PR #308986. I'm interested in adding useful package to nixpkgs. I'm also the maintainer of https://github.com/nix-community/nix4nvchad, which is used by many nvchad's user. I also help fix many broken package especially python packages. However, I've been realised that it is too slow to merge neccessary PRs.
|
|
I would like to nominate myself as a committer. I mainly am interested in keeping existing packages up-to-date and fix them when they are broken. |
|
Hi everyone, I maintain around ~23 packages, mostly Darwin (iOS dev by day), but I don't mind picking up Linux stuff too. Interesting bits of work:
Stats: |
|
@jian-lin Thanks for the feedback! I've been working on reviewing more PRs. I'm up to 64 reviews now, which is more in line with previous accepted applications. |
|
I'd like to nominate myself as a commiter. I've been using and contributing to nixpkgs since 2021: #109114 Notable things I've worked on:
Other than these, I often run into issues with cloud, big data and platform engineering related modules/packages earlier than most. Some examples: #369546 #368313 #328604 #320712 #299653 #218482 Stats: |
|
Hi, I would like to nominate myself as a committer. I have been using and daily-driving NixOS since December 2022, and I am also administering a few servers running NixOS. I started contributing to nixpkgs in November 2023 and I currently maintain ~29 packages (mostly Rust, Go and Python) and 4 modules. Notable PRs:
I am also maintaining Stats: |
|
I would like to second Defelo. I was actually going to come and nominate him myself when I saw that he had just put a comment. He has been very helpful in reviewing my PRs and providing valuable and clear feedback. |
|
I would like to nominate @afh. He has been exceptionally helpful in many PRs with an impeccable focus on friendliness and moving things forward. He is very active on darwin especially and helps to port tons of software to it. Stats: |
|
Hi! I'd like to nominate myself as a committer. I've been using and contributing to nixpkgs since Jun 16, 2023. I have most experience with python and C and currently maintain a hundred packages. Notable prs:
I also like to be part of nixpkgs cleanup initiatives:
I also like to keep the counter of search.nixos.org up to date :) |
|
Thanks for the nomination, @dwt! Around 2016 I was introduced to Nix by @jwiegley and I set out to replace homebrew with nixpkgs on my workstation; hence my focus on macOS related packages. I've been contributing to nixpkgs since 2022, notable things I've worked on include:
things am still working on are: Obligatory Stats
|
|
Endorsing @afh @matteo-pacini @Sigmanificient, I have seen their review/interacted with them a bit, I think they will become a great commiter. |
Hi @Bot-wxt1221 – I appreciate your contributions to Nixpkgs and your work on fixing things and reviewing PRs. However, I’m concerned about the fact that a few months ago I had to open reverts (#347827, #347829) for two packages you added (#345905, #345248) in response to packaging request issues. One of these packages was broken to the point where it wouldn’t start up at all, and one of them was a duplicate package of software we already had, that was related to but not the same as the package the request was for. Mistakes happen, of course; I’ve opened broken PRs myself, and I don’t think it should be an obstacle to becoming a committer! And in this case the problems with the original PRs ought to have been caught on review rather than them been merged; that’s why we have review by committers in the first place. But what concerns me is the communication around these issues; @colemickens reported I realize that people have limited free time and can’t always respond to every issue. Still, we put a lot of trust in committers, and effectively reviewing PRs for problems that the author might not have seen, and communicating openly about mistakes and issues that arise, is their most important job. So I was wondering if you have any comment on what happened in these instances and if you would do anything differently if they happened again; and about what standard of review you’d apply to PRs you merge? |
Well, with most packages running correctly which I packaged. These two packages is only here by accident. I'm always glad to solve missing packages for nixpkgs users however it may not tested carefully. Anyway, we can't miss (#347827, #347829) here. I have realized that it's broken before it is merged. However, I just miss them in many other work. These PRs are accidently ignored in notifications in github. Then it was merged by accident. A committer should make sure that the all things is fit to nixpkgs, including makeing sure they work properly. So, I must be very careful before merging it, especially if it can be started properly to prevent the mistake I make.
These two PRs are all my fault. But as a committer, I find it more important to learn from it and make sure similar PRs shouldn't be merged. It have been about 4 months since these 2 PRs. During 4 months, I'm trying to improve the avalibility of nixpkgs's package. Focusing on fixing build and function error like #379587. Of all, as you said, a committer is trusted to judge whether nixpkgs needs and finding big problems which may be caused by contributor. As long time work with nixpkgs, I found it important to give feedback especially when it comes to an accident. |
|
Thanks for responding! I don’t intend to turn this into a long discussion but I feel I ought to clarify a few things.
To be frank, this just isn’t an acceptable approach to Nixpkgs contribution. An open issue for a package we’re missing is far better for Nixpkgs than a broken package without a maintainer who understands whether it even starts correctly or not – it signals that someone with an interest in the package and enough knowledge about it to properly maintain it could make a useful contribution, whereas a package without a maintainer who understands the software at all just generates user confusion and worsens the project’s reputation. It’s certainly on committers too for missing the problem these times, but we have a general presumption that people who make PRs have tested them for basic functionality unless stated otherwise, and consider themselves qualified to maintain a package they’re adding. Indeed, you checked “Tested basic functionality of all binary files” on these PRs, but in the case of a Tauri application like I didn’t do a thorough review of your PRs after responding to user reports about
I’m confused by what you mean here. Did you intend to link other PRs? The ones you have linked are my PRs to revert the broken packages you added, which I opened only after your PRs adding them had already been merged. Are you saying that you realized that your original PRs to add those packages were broken before they were merged, but didn’t comment on either of them, and didn’t mention it when @colemickens reported problems with one of them and you replied that you’d test it?
I agree that it’s been months and that the most important thing about mistakes is just to learn from them :) And I of course appreciate the effort to review and provide scrutiny to other PRs. As I said, my concern about the incident was just about the communication, and that’s why I asked what you would handle differently about the situation if it occurred today. |
|
@emilazy Any contributors should provide any facts to the PR or issue as soon as they can to prevent broken packages going to nixpkgs by accident especially as a committer. On the other hand, test carefully before merging should can prevent many similar errors. |
|
For transparency, since it concerns the committer delegation team, I have requested @SuperSandro2000’s commit access be reviewed again in #392548. Please do keep any discussion there (I already regret having posted several comments in a row that aren’t nominations for commit access…). |
and others
Hi, the purpose of this issue is to nominate new nixpkgs contributors for commit access to nixpkgs. The process is described in nixpkgs-committers org documentation.
@lorenzleutgeb's script also wrote a script to summarize past github contributions. However more importantly we value when nominees work well together in the community and take ownership for their mistakes.
If you have questions regarding becoming a nixpkgs maintainer, you can contact the Nixpkgs committer delegation team:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: