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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ISSUE_TEMPLATES: remove the package request template #391926

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

SigmaSquadron
Copy link
Contributor

@SigmaSquadron SigmaSquadron commented Mar 21, 2025

As discussed in the Nixpkgs Contributions Matrix room, several contributors have reached a consensus that such a template only encourages future orphaned packages, and needlessly adds work for actual Nixpkgs contributors while demanding nothing from the issue reporter.

Things done

  • This change does not require rebuilds or a changelog entry.
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

Signed-off-by: Fernando Rodrigues <alpha@sigmasquadron.net>
@github-actions github-actions bot added 6.topic: continuous integration Affects continuous integration (CI) in Nixpkgs, including Ofborg and GitHub Actions 6.topic: policy discussion labels Mar 21, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux labels Mar 21, 2025
Copy link
Member

@emilazy emilazy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I think the incentives are bad here: it encourages people to add packages they don’t necessarily care about or don’t have the necessary domain knowledge to ensure are working over time. The result will often be broken packages or ones that get abandoned. As there is always going to be more and more software that Nixpkgs hasn’t packaged and achieving consensus that a piece of software is not worth packaging is hard, the number of these issues will basically inevitably grow forever.

I don’t think there’s never an instance where it makes sense to open an issue for software Nixpkgs is missing – e.g. “we don’t package this piece of software that is required for this common piece of hardware to work properly on NixOS” is a reasonable bug report – but we don’t need an entire form template to encourage it, and the Discourse is often going to be a better place for these requests.

I’ll leave time for others to comment, though.

@SigmaSquadron SigmaSquadron added 9.needs: community feedback significant Novel ideas, large API changes, notable refactorings, issues with RFC potential, etc. and removed significant Novel ideas, large API changes, notable refactorings, issues with RFC potential, etc. labels Mar 21, 2025
@wegank wegank added the 12.approvals: 3+ This PR was reviewed and approved by three or more reputable people label Mar 21, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
6.topic: continuous integration Affects continuous integration (CI) in Nixpkgs, including Ofborg and GitHub Actions 6.topic: policy discussion 9.needs: community feedback 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux 12.approvals: 3+ This PR was reviewed and approved by three or more reputable people
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants