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

Electron player: init at 2.0.8 #96253

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Aug 26, 2020
Merged

Electron player: init at 2.0.8 #96253

merged 2 commits into from Aug 26, 2020

Conversation

ImExtends
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation for this change

Electron player wasn't packaged yet.

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • 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 nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-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)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@nixos-discourse
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032/268

@Lassulus
Copy link
Member

hey, can you make 2 commits out of this PR? one for the maintainers attributen (for which the commit message already seems correct) and one for the package addition (which seems to be inside the other commit by accident).

cheers

@ImExtends
Copy link
Contributor Author

hey, can you make 2 commits out of this PR? one for the maintainers attributen (for which the commit message already seems correct) and one for the package addition (which seems to be inside the other commit by accident).

cheers

Sure, done!
Thanks for your reply

@Lassulus
Copy link
Member

hey, can you maybe do it the other way around, since the package addition depends on the maintainer addition

@ImExtends
Copy link
Contributor Author

hey, can you maybe do it the other way around, since the package addition depends on the maintainer addition

Ah, didn't thought of that haha, done!

name = "${pname}-${version}";

src = fetchurl {
url = "https://github.com/oscartbeaumont/ElectronPlayer/releases/download/v${version}-rc4/${name}.AppImage";
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

weird, that rc4 is part of the url, although this is a stable release. But seems to be an upstream issue. This will probably change on the next stable release and the rc4 should be removed here then. Maybe you can add a comment explaining that?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not sure I completely understand, I should add a comment to remind the other maintainers / me to remove the -rc4 for the next releases, or do you want me to downgrade the version to 2.0.7 as the appimage was released with not additionals tags than 2.0.7 ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, just a reminder to remove the -rc4 if someone just bumps the version should be fine. since 2.0.8 seems to be proper release there is no need to downgrade to 2.0.7

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No problem, is it good ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks good

@Lassulus Lassulus merged commit bd37bc5 into NixOS:master Aug 26, 2020
@hmenke
Copy link
Member

hmenke commented Aug 26, 2020

Should this really be in nixpkgs? The application isn't built from source even though they are available and the website states:

This application has analytics built in which is used to help the developers make a better product.

Doesn't this make it non-free or something like that?

@Lassulus
Copy link
Member

We have other packages which are not build from source, even though they could be. Building electron applications always tends to be a tedious process, but can also be done later if someone has the motivation to do it.
having analytics turned on by default is not nice, but doesn't change the license to unfree IMHO.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants