>I'd argue the opposite—it's beautiful in it's simplicity. It's a tool that lets you express how to create something in a deterministic way.
I'd take a different angle and argue that Nix is Version 1 of what to me looks like a very cool idea, and it's both beautiful and not straightforward to use.
If that matters, wait for version 5. Look at the progression before Docker came on the market - it does what other tools could do, but packaged in a nice, developer-friendly toolkit. I expect the same for Nix in a few years time.
You have the right idea, but you'll be waiting for a long time. Nix is transitional, and a version of Nix which appropriately enforces package-capability discipline likely will not give a traditional Linux/BSD userland. Instead, use Nix today, and shape its future; Nix is currently on version 2.
>I'd argue the opposite—it's beautiful in it's simplicity. It's a tool that lets you express how to create something in a deterministic way.
I'd take a different angle and argue that Nix is Version 1 of what to me looks like a very cool idea, and it's both beautiful and not straightforward to use.
If that matters, wait for version 5. Look at the progression before Docker came on the market - it does what other tools could do, but packaged in a nice, developer-friendly toolkit. I expect the same for Nix in a few years time.