Marketing Team: Can we present Nix/NixOS better?

[jonringer]

I think there’s two main issues from coming from this discussion: lack of a good way to verify changes coming from staging/staging-next PRs, and our release period being awkwardly right before the releases of plasma and gnome.

I have broken this out into two different topics to avoid cluttering this thread with off-topic posts:

Fixing the staging/staging-next workflow

Creating this topic to move the discussion around staging and staging-next workflow into it’s own thread, to avoid cluttering Marketing Team: Can we present Nix/NixOS better? - #115 by flokli with off-topic noise. Problem statement Our current staging and staging-next workflow is ill-equipped in detecting fundamental problems with our package set. Example NixOS Tests broken in master and staging · Issue #96197 · NixOS/nixpkgs · GitHub , anything to do with building a stage1 boot environment …

What should stable NixOS prioritize?

Problem Our stable releases cover a large breadth of use cases, this discussion is talk about what should be prioritized for a stable release. And perhaps optimize our release schedule to align with meeting those core criteria. Context With the 20.09 release, the biggest delay was around polishing the plasma5 experience, with the last blocking item being closed 3 weeks after the original release date: [20.09] kdeFrameworks.plasma-framework: aligned with QtQuick 2.12 by jonringer · Pull Reques…