-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
nix-update-source: init at 0.3.0 #22660
Conversation
''; | ||
}; | ||
meta = { | ||
description = "Utility to autimate updating of nix derivation sources"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
typo "autimate"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, fixed.
4a26d9b
to
f1d42e6
Compare
@joachifm they're similar, but I wouldn't say that either makes the other obsolete. That script does a very particular modification, in a somewhat hacky way. This is a utility which can be used outside nix, allows reading/writing in a machine readable (json) format and should generally be extensible with update strategies beyond what can be implemented with @edolstra , ping? I believe this version addresses your concerns with the previous PR, so if you're happy with this version it'd be great to get this merged for good. |
I think it'd be good if we could standardise on this tool, then, if it is superior; having two tools that are almost-but-not-quite-the-same-thing seems unfortunate. |
Ping, @edolstra ? Sorry to keep troubling you, but this probably needs your OK given what happened last time... |
@edolstra, can you please comment? I'm trying not to pester you too frequently but you're the only person who can unblock this, and it's been over a month with no word. I could try getting other admins to +1 the PR, but without your OK it runs the risk of getting reverted again. To answer your question @joachifm, no I don't believe it's necessary to standardise on one such tool right now. The original PR discussed at length people's different wishes / goals for this kind of tool, and trying to please everyone at once before anyone can use a tool seems like a sure way to get nothing done. Just as there are dozens of packages in nix which accomplish similar things, it doesn't seem reasonable that nix require only one tool which is capable of updating package definitions. |
Pinging a few project members who were active on the original PR: can anyone help me get this PR moving? I believe I've addressed the issue that caused @edolstra to revert the original, but I haven't been able to get a response for 6+ weeks :( |
}; | ||
meta = { | ||
description = "Utility to automate updating of nix derivation sources"; | ||
maintainers = with lib.maintainers; [ timbertson ]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add a license?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done (MIT)
f1d42e6
to
01aed43
Compare
01aed43
to
892fd83
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess I am in favour of that, and I think it generally fixes the exact points @edolstra raised about the previous version, not completely sure if there are more complicated issues that will get raised with this one…
@edolstra this one will need a review from you since it builds on #21734 (which was reverted)
Reintroduce
nix-update-source
at version 0.3.0. This version includes support for modifying a nix file inline[*] instead of using a separate JSON file. This PR also includes apassthru.updateScript
for nix-update-source itself, as an example of JSON-less usage.The version retains support for importing JSON files, since that's still useful for non-
nixpkgs
sources which prefer that method. But there's a comment warning people not to use it nixpkgs proper. I'm hoping this is an acceptable compromise.[*]: it has little actual knowledge of nix syntax, because I don't have a real nix parser available - it relies on the nix file being formatted like a typical derivation
Things done
(nix.useSandbox on NixOS,
or option
build-use-sandbox
innix.conf
on non-NixOS)
nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
./result/bin/
)