-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 366
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
Clarify the status of NixOps #1574
Comments
I've been telling people that nixops is de facto dead for ages, and there has always been some pushback to making it official. I believe @roberth has ideas on how to revive it, but no time to actually implement them, so I'll just defer to him. |
I have actually stopped using NixOps in favor of terraform. While I think the concepts in NixOps are cool, I do agree it seems like it is not getting the maintenance it needs/deserves and unless the community can rally behind it we should probably look towards sunsetting the project. |
I'm making plans and I'll get back to you ~ 20th Dec. |
NixOps 2 has structural problems. If all goes well, anyone can get their hands on it in a couple of months from now, at which point I hope you'll be convinced that In the meanwhile, I will try to get some work done on the current NixOps 2, which is pre-release, to get it towards more of a decent release candidate, as that was part of the promise of the funded Nix deployments collective. So my conclusion is that both projects are "in flux" and any changes we could make now would probably be invalidated soon. Moving repos has quite a significant overhead, so I'd like to avoid doing those things twice, and hence I'd prefer to revisit such decisions a couple of months from now.
I will try my best to make "NixOps 4" a worthy project that the community actually wants to rally behind. I would then expect NixOps 2 to go into maintenance mode, until its users (manually?) migrate to NixOps 4. Maintenance mode might be funded from the collective (as is currently the case), but I'll be in touch with the donors, because both 2 and 4 are in scope for the collective. The NixOps 4 project will most likely not be funded by the collective, but rather be a supporting component of another project that already has significant funding. I'll keep you posted. |
@roberth amazing! 🤩 i would love to hear anything else you are able to elaborate on so please let me know where i can follow along (blogs, issues, repos, discussions, etc...) as they become available as a hobbyist i would be very interested in hearing design decisions, etc..., with the intention of contributing as time permits thanks for posting this! ❤️ |
@roberth Excited for NixOps 4! (terraform integration?)
Just wanted to mention that, as top individual donor of the deployments collective ( 😮 ), I would not mind if NixOps 2 doesn't get to stable. I mean it's clear that there's no future in that. So I'd be fine if all the effort is instead focused on NixOps 4. (Don't know how many NixOps 2 users there are, but I never transitioned from NixOps 1) Do let me know if I can help in any way! (email at profiile) |
Not sure how much time I can dedicate, but while I have migrated off NixOps in favor of terraform, I very much like the ideals of using a Nix-first deployment system. @roberth is there a place somewhere where I could read up more on the plans for NixOps 4 and/or help contribute to the planning/development of the project? |
Duplicate of #1545 |
These two PRs at least fix |
@roberth do you intend to start the development of NixOps 4 here? Would you be OK with it being moved to |
@thufschmitt Moving it disrupts fetching for existing users. If it's going to be moved, I'd prefer to let that coincide with the availability of an alternative, as an opportunity to present the alternative to users.
I'd somewhat prefer a new repo, to start with a fresh and empty issue tracker. I'd also prefer for it to be in Draft plan:
|
At least according to Github's doc, everything should be properly redirected. So it's not really a concern |
I've seen that not work in the past. |
I'm just diving into nix and figured that nixops might be an interesting tool. I've just tried to run Undocumented gotchas like these are a bit frustrating to us end users. |
I have updated the wiki, please feel free to edit / amend etc. I'm not actually affiliated with nixops, just an interested prospective user like the rest of y'all. |
@hraban Thanks for updating the wiki; it's how I found this thread and learned about NixOps 4.
I still actively use NixOps 1.7 to manage a fleet of personal servers for hobby projects. In case anyone else finds it useful, here's how I install it on an otherwise up-to-date ( let
oldpkgs =
let
nixpkgs-src =
builtins.fetchTarball {
# Find latest commit at https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/commits/nixos-23.05
url = "https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/archive/70bdadeb94ffc8806c0570eb5c2695ad29f0e421.tar.gz";
sha256 = "05cbl1k193c9la9xhlz4y6y8ijpb2mkaqrab30zij6z4kqgclsrd";
};
in (import nixpkgs-src) {};
in {
environment.systemPackages = [
oldpkgs.nixops
];
} |
This issue has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/how-can-i-install-nixops/39957/4 |
for anyone interested in a i want to emphasize that the script is little as it doesn't intend to write large high level abstractions but instead just leverage those directly from |
I would love to try & support Hetzner Cloud via a NixOps plugin, but it seems like now is not the time... has the groundwork for NixOps4 been started somewhere or is it still a plan for now? |
I've been talking with @roberth about that next week. There's no public plan yet (at least there wasn't at that time). We agreed to have NixOps4 start in a dedicated organisation for now. I don't think it has been created yet, but it should be something like https://github.com/NixOps4 |
... you're a braver man than I am, posting a link to a username before registering it and hoping nobody will namesquat it >.> |
I've registered it just now. That was risky. |
Ooops, I didn't even think of that 🤦♂️ |
This issue has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/tweag-nix-dev-update-55/40996/1 |
I've created nixops4/nixops4.
Feel free to review the PRs, ask questions, etc. You can also use the GitHub discussions on the repo. |
@roberth Could you clarify the scope a bit? Will nixops4 be able to
If yes, how exactly does that work? |
@roberth Could you clarify the scope a bit? Will nixops4 be able to
If yes, how exactly does that work? |
In general you'd tend to have at least two resources:
Hard-reboot is not necessarily part of the NixOps4 resource interface, but this could either be a manual
This could be implemented in the resources that maintains the NixOS installation, or it could be a separate resource that is configured to run before the NixOS installation. In that case, it'd be a resource that consists of no-ops except for creation.
I don't know exactly, because we'll have some freedom in terms of how NixOS integrates with NixOps. I'm sure it will evolve a bit. |
Although NixOps used to be the de-facto tool for deploying NixOS machines, it isn't as maintained any more. Keeping it as an official project is a bit of a lie since we (the community) are barely maintaining it.
We discussed it during the Nix teams representative gathering last month, and there was a broad agreement in favour of sunsetting it one way or another.
A few solutions that were mentioned:
nix-community
?) if a group of people shows enough motivation for maintaining it@K900 , @scottbot95 , @roberth : you're the only ones who contributed to it over the past year, what is your opinion on the matter?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: