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

python: pyspf: 2.0.13 -> 2.0.14pre1 #75604

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 7, 2020
Merged

python: pyspf: 2.0.13 -> 2.0.14pre1 #75604

merged 1 commit into from Jan 7, 2020

Conversation

ghost
Copy link

@ghost ghost commented Dec 13, 2019

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 nix-review --run "nix-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.
Notify maintainers

cc @FRidh @jonringer

@ghost ghost requested review from FRidh and jonringer as code owners December 13, 2019 14:03
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Dec 13, 2019

CC @infinisil

@FRidh
Copy link
Member

FRidh commented Dec 13, 2019

Why not fix 2.0.13?

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Dec 13, 2019

Fixing 2.0.13 would also be fine for me

@spacekookie
Copy link
Member

Why not fix 2.0.13?

While that would be the better approach, I feel it might be important to people depending on unstable to get a working config back

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from abbradar December 13, 2019 14:22
@ghost ghost changed the title Revert "python: pyspf: 2.0.12 -> 2.0.13" python: pyspf: 2.0.13 -> 2.0.14pre1 Dec 13, 2019
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Dec 13, 2019

I have changed this PR to update to 2.0.14pre1, which includes the fix.

jonringer
jonringer approved these changes Dec 16, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jonringer jonringer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

diff LGTM
commit LGTM

[5 built, 3 copied (0.4 MiB), 0.1 MiB DL]
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/75604
4 package were built:
pypolicyd-spf python27Packages.pyspf python37Packages.pyspf python38Packages.pyspf

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

@GrahamcOfBorg build pypolicyd-spf python27Packages.pyspf python37Packages.pyspf python38Packages.pyspf

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jan 7, 2020 •
edited by ghost

This must be merged or fixed otherwise before 20.03.
I am a bit frustrated with this issue, because it was broken, fixed, broken again and this fix was first criticised, then changed to match the criticism and now it is not being merged. I can apply the patch to my nixpkgs branch for my machines, but I can not recommend to anyone to run a mail server with NixOS if they have to manually apply patches to Nixpkgs to make it work properly.

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

@GrahamcOfBorg build pypolicyd-spf python27Packages.pyspf python37Packages.pyspf python38Packages.pyspf

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

with a limited number of people for reviewing, it's hard to keep up with the wave of PRs, bumping helps in cases like this

@jonringer jonringer merged commit fe2742c into NixOS:master Jan 7, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@FRidh FRidh Awaiting requested review from FRidh

@abbradar abbradar Awaiting requested review from abbradar

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
6.topic: python 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@FRidh @spacekookie @jonringer