Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
let's skip this for now I think but do the rest:
Basically, I don't think the
inputSrcs
vsinputDrvs
distinction is very useful for the user. From the user's perspective I think it is better to think that the inputs are just the closure of some set of store objects, and those store objects are specified either directly by store path, or by (drv path, output name) pair.Also I rather not link to source code, as stuff gets moved around fairly frequently. (Yes, there is a commit hash in there, but old code can also be misleading.) Hopefully this stuff gets some proper reference docs soon, and then the the nix pills can link it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I personally prefer to leave this paragraph. If someone isn't interested in the details, it's very easy to skip, as it's between parentheses and starts with "for completeness". However, for me it feels better to feel that I better understand the details of this "magic". I think that specifically mentioning source inputs in addition to derivation inputs has value, since the description about taking the output of a derivation doesn't apply for those inputs.
Regarding the link to the source code, I agree it's not ideal, but until there is a proper reference, I think that it's better than nothing. When there is a proper reference, we should obviously link to it instead of the source. Do you think it will be better if we make it clearer that you should check the current sources and not what's in the actual link? For example, we can have:
Also, reading it again, if we decide to leave this paragraph, I think I would make the description clearer. Instead of:
Write: