proposal: nixos-stable branch

[lizelive]

I am writing to propose the creation of a nixos-stable branch that points to the most current stable release of NixOS.

The rationale behind this request is to enhance the usability and functionality of Nix Flakes. As you may know, Nix Flakes provide a new way to manage Nix packages, allowing for reproducible, composable, and user-friendly configurations. However, the current setup does not have a straightforward way to refer to the latest stable release of NixOS.

By introducing a nixos-stable branch, users can easily refer to the latest stable release in their flake configurations. This would not only simplify the configuration process but also ensure that users are always working with the most up-to-date stable release.

I believe this change would be a valuable addition to NixOS and greatly benefit the community. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this proposal.

[eclairevoyant]

If a user chooses a stable release, they expect stability. Our nixos-2x.xx branches are a promise to maintain that stability (outside of things like security fixes of course). Automatically upgrading the branch breaks that promise. In fact there are many users still using 22.11 intentionally, because for various reasons they need to upgrade on their own schedule.

Therefore I am strongly against this proposal.

If you really want the latest, use nixos-unstable, that is what it is there for.

[IogaMaster]

I see where you are coming from, updating like a standard distro would (aka reliable stable automatic version updates without needing to change the flake input). What eclairevoyant is saying is true however, just don't update nixos/nixpkgs-unstable often and you get the same thing.

Keep this open so we can see some more opinions!
Thanks for bringing fresh ideas into nixos/nixpkgs!

[iynaix]

I don't think a nixos-stable branch is worth all the trouble vs users manually updating a flake input once every 6 months.

[lizelive]

the issue is one of security. we don't keep updating old branches with vulnerabilities, meaning it is very easy to not notice old packages being vulnerable.

[eclairevoyant]

The issue is that users will get automatically shoved onto the next release, instead of choosing when to upgrade. In fact, how would these users know when the "stable" channel is getting a breaking change, and prepare for it?

[IogaMaster]

how would these users know when the "stable" channel is getting a breaking change

When 24.06 comes around the nixos-stable branch is a mirror of nixos-24.06

[eclairevoyant]

How does the user know about it?? They just get silently upgraded. And 24.06 is not a thing.

[khaneliman]

Just my two cents... users will opt in to release cadence. It's not the rug being pulled from them. I see the use case as described, someone who doesn't want the rolling release breaking nature of unstable breaks every few days. But, wants to keep up with latest versioned release without keeping track of release dates.

[eclairevoyant]

You're not opting in if you have to already know the release date anyway 😉

[IogaMaster]

How does the user know about it?? They just get silently upgraded. And 24.06 is not a thing.

24.06 was an example. Users would be assumed to know the release schedule. Which is not good, as stable should be backports only.

[eclairevoyant]

If the user already knows the release schedule then they know when to change their flake input, which makes this whole request pointless.

[bjornfor]

A related thread started in 2019: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/why-is-there-no-rolling-stable-channel/3322

[IogaMaster]

Using unstable would give you those problems on an even spread across a release cycle, using your potential “latest-release” alias would slap you straight in the face with all the problems at once exactly 2 times a year.
Usually it is easier to resolve the problems over time as they arise, rather than having to deal with all of the problems at once.

+1

[LunNova]

Some alternative ideas to avoid accidentally using an old stable branch past its maintenance period:

• final commit marking it past support after the branch is EoL which adds a trace/warning during evaluation?
• • would need an optout mechanism
• warning in nixos activation script if date is too far in the future?

I think a rolling stable release branch could be useful although I don't know if my usecase is the same as @lizelive's. I run unstable but have a nixpkgs-stable input specifically for a few critical packages like firefox where stable often gets security updates faster than unstable as that branch can be stalled due to brokenness, and having it roll would make sense there.

Trying to avoid people accidentally remaining on an old version seems like a good goal but I don't expect a rolling release branch is the best solution for most users.

[bjornfor]

warning in nixos activation script if date is too far in the future?

Coincidentally, yesterday I learned that hostnamectl already shows remaining OS support time:

$ hostnamectl 
[...]
    Operating System: NixOS 23.05 (Stoat)             
      OS Support End: Sun 2023-12-31
OS Support Remaining: 1month 2d
[...]

(I guess it knows thanks to SUPPORT_END= in /etc/os-release.)

[eclairevoyant]

Very similar to #20182 and a straight duplicate of #21340, closing.