remove incorrect reference to NIX_PATH documentation
#7514
Conversation
fricklerhandwerk
requested review from
edolstra and
thufschmitt
as code owners
fricklerhandwerk
force-pushed
the
opt-I
branch
from
3449b1d
to
d9e19b2
Compare
|
Prefer to merge after
|
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/2023-01-06-nix-team-meeting-minutes-21/24573/1 |
GitHub ate my file comment 😠 Basically I was asking whether footnote-like link syntax is robust enough for snippets, considering that the reference names may collide. |
Good point, actually. |
the semantics are not explained in the referenced section any more, they have been moved to the documentation for common options in the new CLI [0]. [0]: 703d863
fricklerhandwerk
changed the title
NIX_PATH documentation
|
@roberth things fixed themselves underneath, rebased. Now this PR is as tiny as it should be. |
Co-authored-by: John Ericson <git@JohnEricson.me>
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/2023-04-17-nix-team-meeting-minutes-49/27379/1 |
the semantics are not explained in the referenced section any more.
they have been moved to the documentation for common options in the new CLI in #7421.
unfortunately I was under the incorrect impression that there was only one source for the documentation of common options, so in fact the change made discoverability of that piece of documentation strictly worse.
while I know that de facto the classic command line is not maintained any more, I still suggest to fix that properly. who knows how long it will be around...
This work is sponsored by Antithesis ✨