@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+## This is a placeholder file. It will be overwritten by the test.

@@ -0,0 +31,4 @@
+          ../common/nixosTest.nix
+          ./nixosTest.nix
+        ];
+        _module.args.inputs = inputs;

@@ -0,0 +40,4 @@
+        flakeIgnore = [
+          "E302"
+          "E303" # too many blank lines
+          "E305"

@@ -0,0 +150,4 @@
+        production = true;
+        domain = "deployer";
+        secrets = {
+          SECRET_KEY = dummyFile; # REVIEW: what is this secret for?

@@ -0,0 +169,4 @@
+        peertube
+        peertube.inputDerivation
+        gixy
+        gixy.inputDerivation

@@ -0,0 +252,4 @@
+    ## someone wanted to change the code of the flake.
+    ##
+    with subtest("Give the panel access to the flake"):
+      deployer.succeed("mkdir /run/fedipanel /run/fedipanel/flake >&2")

@@ -0,0 +259,4 @@
+    ## REVIEW: I want a programmatic way to provide an SSH key to the panel (and
+    ## therefore NixOps4). This should happen either in the Python code, but
+    ## maybe it is fair that that one picks up on the user's key? It could
+    ## also be in the Nix packaging.

@@ -0,0 +276,4 @@
+    ## generate _usable_ certificates in NixOS tests. I suggest we merge this,
+    ## and track the task to set it up in a cleaner way. I would tackle this in
+    ## a subsequent PR, and hopefully even contribute this BetterWay(tm) to
+    ## nixpkgs. — Niols

@@ -0,0 +293,4 @@
+      """)
+
+    ## REVIEW: I would hope for a more declarative way to add users. This should
+    ## be handled by the Nix packaging of the FediPanel. — Niols

@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ def get_secret(name: str, encoding: str = "utf-8") -> str:
     return secret
 
 # SECURITY WARNING: keep the secret key used in production secret!
+# REVIEW: This seems to be used nowhere; can we get rid of it?