onlyoffice-bin_latest: 7.5.1 -> 8.0.0

[fin444]

Description of changes

Changelog

ONLYOFFICE is still broken on wlroots. Thus, only the _latest package is being updated to preserve compatibility.

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[fin444]

The way the split-package setup was handled meant that it needed to be renamed every update, OfBorg interpreted this as a new package and it tripped the new test for pkgs/by-name. It seemed to me the best way to handle this was just to move ONLYOFFICE over to the new scheme. I think I did it correctly?

[infinisil]

I believe this was a false positive in the pkgs/by-name check (notably that's not ofborg). There's already a PR that would fix it: #285089

So there's no need to migrate this to pkgs/by-name. And indeed I wouldn't recommend it especially because of the complexity with multiple package versions, which pkgs/by-name can't deal with yet.

[fin444]

If I am understanding your PR correctly, it is designed to fix cases where the two versions are defined by the same file, called with different arguments? That is not the case here, the two versions have very different setups and so use different files.

[infinisil]

Ohh sorry you're right, this is not a case where that PR would've helped. Looking at the first commit in this PR (42a8cab), for all CI can see, onlyoffice-bin_8_0 is indeed a new package using callPackage, therefore it would have to go into pkgs/by-name.

On one hand, if you have completely separate expressions, migration to pkgs/by-name sounds good. However in this case I do see the potential to refactor these to have more shared code, which then wouldn't work the same in pkgs/by-name.

I'd say that's up to the maintainers, especially also the decision of whether it makes sense to keep pinned old versions around.

Something generally important though: Don't remove top-level attributes without adding at least a throw alias in aliases.nix to say why it got removed.

[fin444]

ONLYOFFICE versions past 7.2 are completely inoperable on wlroots (and they don't seem interested in fixing it), which is why the package was split in the first place. onlyoffice-bin is kept as-is for compatibility, while onlyoffice-bin_latest is updated. Over time, I would expect the two to continue to diverge, so I'm not sure combining them would be good in the long term. (And the idea is that if they were to decided to fix it we could just make the newer version be the definitive one and un-split them)

But you are correct on the throw alias, I have now added it.

[infinisil]

Over time, I would expect the two to continue to diverge, so I'm not sure combining them would be good in the long term

Sounds good to keep them separate then!

[fin444]

Also on the subject of update.sh - I copied it into both since that's how it was before. I'm not entirely sure how these work, but I don't really know if this was the correct move? They also just don't seem to have been working in the first place, even before the package split.

[GTrunSec]

I'm not entirely sure how these work, but I don't really know if this was the correct move?

@fin444, you can try the command as follows to check whether the update script works.

nix-shell maintainers/scripts/update.nix --argstr package onlyoffice-<version>

[fin444]

Ah, I was under the impression they were there for r-ryantm, not for the maintainers. They do still work, but looks like I broke _latest's when updating to 7.4 because I put the passthru in the wrong spot. Have fixed that now.

I'm learning in this PR 😆

[GTrunSec]

LGTM