I like mise a lot. As somewhat of a power user I've also found its rough edges though.

One is related to "change tracking" for tasks. Knowing when a task needs to run and when not based on inputs and outputs. I believe it uses mtimes and has somewhat similar problems in doing that reliably as make. For example, it would be nice if deleted files in output dirs would result in a task having to re-run.

Another is that I wish it was also a better task runner for long running foreground tasks. I've had to resort to pairing it up with pitchfork (by the same author but moreso an init system), overmind or hivemind. I think it should have the same set of options as pitchfork. And more controls around interrupt handling or setting delay/wait time after receiving an interrupt.

Popular in 2024 (164 points, 37 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40186768

echo 'use flake' > .envrc && direnv allow

One file for both packaging and devshell with all necessary dependencies installed from the vast nixpkgs repository. Pinning comes built-in, reproducible.

i think mise does too much. the deeper you go into its features the more rough edges you’ll find. i predominantly use nix on macos for managing app-level tool and package deps, but mise does a better job for this when you’re a part of a team (and can’t be overly prescriptive).

mise tasks gets gross pretty fast in my experience.

My team at work uses Mise for nearly all repos, regardless of stack (Python backends, React frontings, data science repos). I typically prefer to use Make for this kind of stuff, but they were already using Mise when I joined.

It’s been a fairly pleasant experience overall. I think sometimes it tries to do too much, but it works okay-ish.

The only thing I would recommend to stay away from is the encrypted secrets stuff. That’s way too much of a foot gun.

where does this fit in with make, just, nix (devshell, devenv, ...), direnv, etc.