# Nixf-tidy: static/semantic linter for nix, help me to integrate it with Github Actions (PR Reviews?)

**URL:** https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixf-tidy-static-semantic-linter-for-nix-help-me-to-integrate-it-with-github-actions-pr-reviews/43911
**Category:** Development
**Created:** [April 22, 2024, 5:35pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixf-tidy-static-semantic-linter-for-nix-help-me-to-integrate-it-with-github-actions-pr-reviews/43911 "2024-04-22T17:35:56Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![piegames](https://discourse.nixos.org/user_avatar/discourse.nixos.org/piegames/32/5324_2.png) [@piegames](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/piegames)
#### Post date: [April 23, 2024, 9:48am UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixf-tidy-static-semantic-linter-for-nix-help-me-to-integrate-it-with-github-actions-pr-reviews/43911/4 "2024-04-23T09:48:12Z")

</div>

Indeed, the formatting RFC has little to nothing to do with linting except that we need both. I did a topic on linting, it contains a good collection of already existing linting tools. In the end, it’s not the specific tool which matters, but the need for actually integrating this into Nixpkgs.

> [@We need Nixpkgs linting](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/we-need-nixpkgs-linting/37620):
>
> The amount of person-hours we currently waste on manually reviewing things which could be automated is not okay. The advantages of automated code quality checking: It reduces the amount of back and forth between author and reviewer, because a lot of fixes can be done locally already. This reduces stress and is faster due to having a lower round trip latency. It reduces the amount of nitpicky review comments, increasing the signal-to-noise ratio for actually important review comments. Higher qu…

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixf-tidy-static-semantic-linter-for-nix-help-me-to-integrate-it-with-github-actions-pr-reviews/43911)._