I think it is bad for these reasons when `tests/` contains a mix of
functional and integration tests
- Concepts is harder to understand, the documentation makes a good
unit vs functional vs integration distinction, but when the
integration tests are just two subdirs within `tests/` this is not
clear.
- Source filtering in the `flake.nix` is more complex. We need to
filter out some of the dirs from `tests/`, rather than simply pick
the dirs we want and take all of them. This is a good sign the
structure of what we are trying to do is not matching the structure
of the files.
With this change we have a clean:
```shell-session
$ git show 'HEAD:tests'
tree HEAD:tests
functional/
installer/
nixos/
```
(cherry picked from commit 68c81c7375)
I just had a colleague get confused by the previous phrase for good
reason. "valid" sounds like an *objective* criterion, e.g. and *invalid
signature* would be one that would be trusted by no one, e.g. because it
misformatted or something.
What is actually going is that there might be a signature which is
perfectly valid to *someone else*, but not to the user, because they
don't trust the corresponding public key. This is a *subjective*
criterion, because it depends on the arbitrary and personal choice of
which public keys to trust.
I therefore think "trustworthy" is a better adjective to use. Whether
something is worthy of trust is clearly subjective, and then "trust"
within that word nicely evokes `trusted-public-keys` and friends.
The name had become a misnomer since it's not only for substitution
from binary caches, but when adding/copying any
(non-content-addressed) path to a store.
Robert Hensing