How Nix and NixOS get so close to perfect
As someone who <i>really</i> would like to have something like nix the thing that scares me away every time is the fact that the people creating this aparently did not think a lot about how to onboard users.<p>And I don&#x27;t mean a lack of documentation — what I mean is that the obvious decisions that have been taken (naming everything &quot;Nix&quot;, using Haskell as a base for the syntax, ...) don&#x27;t really fill me with confidence that in other spots decisions have been made in a logical and&#x2F;or straightforward way.<p>I am trying to have a less terrible experience with dependency and configuration management — but what I am <i>not</i> trying is making dependency and configuration managment my nerdy hobby. I have enough nerdy hobbies already.<p>So in short: My worry is that the seemingly big investment in terms of time is not worth the advantage this might give me over e.g. a traditional debian system.<p>The thing is: I really, <i>really</i> want an system that does the things nix does, but nix doesn&#x27;t seem to be it. I am grateful about the honest presentation, but if nix is really the future, these paper cuts have to be dealt with.