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

Jump to bottom

Document conventions around adding new maintainers #96666

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 11, 2020
Merged

Document conventions around adding new maintainers #96666

merged 1 commit into from Nov 11, 2020

Conversation

raboof
Copy link
Member

@raboof raboof commented Aug 30, 2020

Adding them to maintainers/maintainer-list in a separate commit.

Motivation for this change
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.

@raboof raboof mentioned this pull request Aug 30, 2020
Closed
10 tasks
prusnak
prusnak reviewed Aug 30, 2020
View reviewed changes
doc/stdenv/meta.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@raboof raboof force-pushed the nixpkgs-document-new-maintainer-convention branch from bdc4f4c to 78cdefb Compare August 30, 2020 14:05
Atemu
Atemu approved these changes Sep 1, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Atemu Atemu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might also want to strip the stdenv prefix, I don't see much of a point in using it when packages usually have lib in their arguments anyways.

@raboof raboof force-pushed the nixpkgs-document-new-maintainer-convention branch from 78cdefb to 8014df9 Compare September 1, 2020 15:19
@raboof
Copy link
Member Author

raboof commented Sep 1, 2020

Might also want to strip the stdenv prefix, I don't see much of a point in using it when packages usually have lib in their arguments anyways.

Makes sense, esp. since this is the section on stdenv anyway.

@raboof raboof requested a review from prusnak October 29, 2020 08:03
@raboof
Copy link
Member Author

raboof commented Nov 9, 2020

/marvin opt-in
/status needs_reviewer

@marvin-mk2
Copy link

marvin-mk2 bot commented Nov 9, 2020

Hi! I'm an experimental bot. My goal is to guide this PR through its stages, hopefully ending with a merge. You can read up on the usage here.

@marvin-mk2 marvin-mk2 bot requested a review from kevincox November 11, 2020 03:23
kevincox
kevincox reviewed Nov 11, 2020
View reviewed changes
doc/stdenv/meta.xml
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ hello-2.3 A program that produces a familiar, friendly greeting
<listitem>
<para>
A list of names and e-mail addresses of the maintainers of this Nix expression. If you would like to be a maintainer of a package, you may want to add yourself to <link
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
A list of names and e-mail addresses of the maintainers of this Nix expression. If you would like to be a maintainer of a package, you may want to add yourself to <link
A list of the maintainers of this Nix expression. Maintainers are defined in <link xlink:href="https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/maintainers/maintainer-list.nix"><filename>nixpkgs/maintainers/maintainer-list.nix</filename></link>. Add each new maintainer to that list in a separate commit titled 'maintainers: add alice', and reference maintainers with <literal>maintainers = with lib.maintainers; [ alice bob ]</literal>.

The previous wording was very wishy-washy. I prefer the instructions being very concrete.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

While I agree this sentence can probably be improved further, I'm reluctant to delay this PR even more by increasing its scope.

It is probably good to keep the information that it is OK to add yourself as a maintainer - that seems lost in your proposal.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I thought it was implied by "each new maintainer". However I guess we can be explicit that there is no barrier to becoming a new maintainer.

Ok, even if you don't want to update the previous sentence in this PR I still would like to clean up the modified sentence to be a bit more direct.

kevincox
kevincox reviewed Nov 11, 2020
View reviewed changes
doc/stdenv/meta.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@raboof @prusnak
@Atemu @kevincox
Document conventions around adding new maintainers
292de46 
Adding them to `maintainers/maintainer-list` in a separate commit.

Co-Authored-By: Pavol Rusnak <pavol@rusnak.io>
Co-Authored-By: Atemu <atemu.main@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Kevin Cox <kevincox@kevincox.ca>
@raboof raboof force-pushed the nixpkgs-document-new-maintainer-convention branch from 8014df9 to 292de46 Compare November 11, 2020 13:07
@kevincox kevincox merged commit be4d08b into NixOS:master Nov 11, 2020
@raboof
Copy link
Member Author

raboof commented Nov 11, 2020

Thanks for the suggestions all!

kevincox added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 11, 2020
@kevincox
Make maintainer documentation more direct
abe563e 
Additionally fixes the "list of names and emails" to be a list of maintainer expressions.

A follow-up from the discussion in #96666
@kevincox kevincox mentioned this pull request Nov 11, 2020
Merged
kevincox added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2020
@kevincox
Make maintainer documentation more direct (#103455)
d3a3014 
Additionally fixes the "list of names and emails" to be a list of maintainer expressions.

A follow-up from the discussion in #96666
@worldofpeace
Copy link
Contributor

Thx for this PR @kevincox ✨

@kevincox
Copy link
Contributor

I just made a comment. The initiative and work was thanks to @raboof!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@kevincox kevincox kevincox approved these changes

@Atemu Atemu Atemu approved these changes

@prusnak prusnak Awaiting requested review from prusnak

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
8.has: documentation 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 10.rebuild-linux: 0 awaiting_reviewer marvin
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@raboof @worldofpeace @kevincox @prusnak @Atemu