something like a lixpkgs
I really want to avoid at least that much. Maintaining nixpkgs takes huge amount of work, so it’s an important thing to share. Also this implies the infra (builders, cache.nixos.org, etc.) I don’t mean to attack you, but I feel like you don’t really understand the full consequences of such level of incompatibility. It’s like maintaining a new independent distro.
Er, what exactly would cause Lix to be ejected from nixpkgs? I don’t see why even not being able to evaluate a subset of nixpkgs would cause a maintainer to remove it just because it’s different. After all, guix can’t evaluate nixpkgs but it’s still in there.
What? Why? First of all, there is no reason whatsoever to assume such hostilities from Nixpkgs maintainers. Let me remind you that pacman, dpkg and apt are all currently packaged in Nixpkgs without much ceremony to my knowledge. For all the conflict there is in Nixpkgs at times, such levels of petty spite would be unprecedented.
Secondly, there is no lixpkgs and as far as I am concerned there never will be. There have been two Nixpkgs fork attempts in the past (that I know of), the first one resulting in the founding of AFNix - Association Française Nix which the Lix project then joined and the second one as a project under the AFNix umbrella. But this has little to do with Lix as the project itself, and thus is a bit off-topic for here
My recollection from .. a couple of years ago? Was that nixpkgs actually used lix to build at one point while waiting for a bug to get fixed in cppnix. If there is any hostility, or more charitably, “an awareness of significant divergence of ethos”, I think it’s between lix and cppnix, not lix and nixpkgs. But we’re all too tired to relitigate that one, aren’t we? :(
You’re probably referring to: Document why Lix is used on builders by infinisil · Pull Request #554 · NixOS/infra · GitHub .
If there is any hostility, or more charitably, “an awareness of significant divergence of ethos”, I think it’s with cppnix, not nixpkgs.
As far as I can read, it’s not so much hostility or divergence of ethos than the infrastructure needing to get a working nixlang interpreter.
My main concern is that we’re going have 2 Nix langs practically tbh
Detnix is introducing eval time wasm support, so it may even be all more langs in the future. 
That’s a proprietary fork that is more aimed at businesses, and has little to do with this community. Let’s keep this thread on topic of the Lix release.
My main concern is that we’re going have 2 Nix langs practically tbh
Effectively, we already had X languages, even before forking… Because even CppNix has different versions, with varying degrees of compatibility between these.
That’s a proprietary fork that is more aimed at businesses, and has little to do with this community. Let’s keep this thread on topic of the Lix release.
Concerns were raised in this thread regarding the impact lix might have, as a forked interpreter, on the language.
Putting that into perspective: there are other sources of divergence in nixlang interpretation (other interpreters, different versions), it doesn’t seem fair to hold lix solely accountable for that.
Which weren’t real concerns, since they were raised by a well known community member whose sole contribution to the community is to instigate drama. Even that whole discussion was off-topic frankly.
Maybe the mods can separate this discussion into another thread?