instead of (used with legacy)
- the/a file in a (more or less clean) directory has to be named “flake.nix”? -
is not a flake (because it doesn't contain a 'flake.nix' file)
– means implicit that meaningful/semantic naming can only be done via the directory name?
- it is not possible to call a specific file with an arbitrarily name
- it not possible to have more than
one flake.nix in a directory?
- it cannot be used without the file been added via git (outside of a git context)?
your view a project based (where you know what and how you want to build up your idea) -
What I’m referring to is -
stage 1 - an ad-hoc/dynamic environment where you test (and switch back and forth) out very different technologies and ways to get a fitting direction for the project
In my point of view those two states someone goes through while creating something new (perhaps complex) has quite different requirements (and flakes looks like [only] focused on the second stage at the moment)
nix-shell is not limited to
shell.nix or default.nix (
nix-shell hello_xy.nix works fine, right?)
In e.g. vscode I have > 5 flake.nix files open (so that I always have to get the path [which has to be short not shorten the tab itself …] not the file name …)
- with nix-shell and proper file names that was very clear (with short tabs [individual file naming → not path added in the tab itself] … )
I don’t want to discuss about (good or bad) flakes here!
I would like to get to know if there are any workarounds to use flakes as it would be efficient for my work (and if not, I have to write some scripts to automate the boilerplate and arrange a new logic of handling the initial phase)
It’s not necessary to add
flake.nix under version control, just add
path:$PWD to your nix call, like this:
nix develop path:$PWD