jazzy: 0.9.0 -> 0.9.5

[lilyball]

Motivation for this change

Updates the jazzy package.

Things done

• Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
• Built on platform(s)
  • NixOS
  • macOS
  • other Linux distributions
• Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
• Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
• Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
• Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

/cc @peterromfeldhk

I had to update the update script. I did not make it match what we settled on with cocoapods because asking bundler to build and install all the packages was actually problematic (not only is it completely unnecessary but I ran into a problem with it depending on sqlite). So instead we just ask bundler to generate the lockfile and let bundix do its work and it works just fine. Next time cocoapods is updated we should probably update its update script again to match.

[lilyball]

What does it take to get package updates processed?

[lilyball]

I've updated the commit to add myself as a maintainer of the package as well, as @peterromfeldhk does not seem to be particularly responsive.

[ryantm]

@GrahamcOfBorg build jazzy

[peterromfeldhk]

its not like i can merge it :/ why do i need to respond if there is nothing i can do?

…

On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 6:06 AM Lily Ballard ***@***.***> wrote: I've updated the commit to add myself as a maintainer of the package as well, as @peterromfeldhk <https://github.com/peterromfeldhk> does not seem to be particularly responsive. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#56399 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFQpu8F9y29tPg_XB4JREg1uzyWtAC5lks5vUDwAgaJpZM4bRfwi> .

[lilyball]

@peterromfeldhk As the listed maintainer you should at least approve (or reject) the change.

[ryantm]

@peterromfeldhk You could use https://github.com/Mic92/nix-review nix-review pr 56399 to build and test this commit and see if it behaves the way you expect it to.

[peterromfeldhk]

hmm ok, i looked at it (it was fine). there was no approve button, but i can add approve comment if that makes it easier.

…

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 10:14 AM Ryan Mulligan ***@***.***> wrote: @peterromfeldhk <https://github.com/peterromfeldhk> You could use https://github.com/Mic92/nix-review nix-review pr 56399 to build and test this commit and see if it behaves the way you expect it to. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#56399 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFQpu6Le0ge-b4KLUR36ErrutzadjT9Eks5vWbCegaJpZM4bRfwi> .

[ryantm]

Yes, a approval comment from the maintainer is very helpful. Once RFC 39 is implemented it will be possible for you to submit a approval review of PRs in GitHub.