Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: clarify flake types and implied defaults #9237

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 25, 2023

Conversation

iFreilicht
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation

What flake types are implied depending on context is currently not clear.

This PR fixes a few minor issue, makes it clear that the default flake type is indirect and clearly shows under which circumstances the types path: or git+file: can be implied.

Context

I wanted to fix path being incorrectly shown as the default type for a while, but this comment finally nudged me to do it.

Priorities

Add 馃憤 to pull requests you find important.

Copy link
Member

@thufschmitt thufschmitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, quite helpful indeed :)

@thufschmitt thufschmitt merged commit d571f17 into NixOS:master Oct 25, 2023
8 checks passed
Copy link
Contributor

@fricklerhandwerk fricklerhandwerk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me, strict improvement. Also scary much complexity @roberth.

[flake:]<flake-id>(/<rev-or-ref>(/rev)?)?
```

These perform a lookup of `<flake-id>` in the flake registry. For
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI: Following recent discussions it looks like we're going to call it just "registry" (as it's a convenience layer for fetching remote file system objects, which is not specific to flakes) and it may get constrained to be only available on command line calls.

In any case it would be good to link to documentation on the registry here. I see you just moved that text, but it may be worthwhile improving bits here and there while at it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point! I'd be happy to make another PR that replaces all mentions of the flake registry or nix registry with "registry" and link all those occurrences to nix3-registry.md.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation new-cli Relating to the "nix" command
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants