Skip to content
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

Add gargoyle-nix package #12

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 5, 2018
Merged

Add gargoyle-nix package #12

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 5, 2018

Conversation

3noch
Copy link
Collaborator

@3noch 3noch commented Jun 1, 2018

No description provided.

@ryantrinkle
Copy link
Member

@danharaj Would you mind reviewing and merging?

@ghost ghost self-requested a review June 4, 2018 15:19
Copy link

@ghost ghost left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This package shouldn't be called gargoyle-nix because in the future gargoyle will be used for more than just postgres. I'm not sure what a good name would be, or how we should separate nix functionality from the main gargoyle-* packages in general.

@3noch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

3noch commented Jun 4, 2018

@danharaj How about gargoyle-nix-postgres? ;)

@ryantrinkle
Copy link
Member

@3noch @danharaj Not sure which of you should merge, but please merge away.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 4, 2018

@3noch Could you rename the package and merge?

@3noch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

3noch commented Jun 4, 2018

@danharaj Yep.

@3noch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

3noch commented Jun 5, 2018

@danharaj I'm thinking gargoyle-postgresql-nix would be better since it matches the module import Gargoyle.PostgreSQL.Nix.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 5, 2018

Sure

@3noch 3noch merged commit 80dfffb into master Jun 5, 2018
@3noch 3noch deleted the add-gargoyle-nix branch June 5, 2018 17:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants