pythonPackages.icecream: init at 2.0.0 #86029
Conversation
|
|
||
| meta = with lib; { | ||
| description = "Get information about what a frame is currently doing, particularly the AST node being executed"; | ||
| homepage = https://github.com/alexmojaki/executing; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
rfc 45
| homepage = https://github.com/alexmojaki/executing; | |
| homepage = "https://github.com/alexmojaki/executing"; |
|
|
||
| meta = with lib; { | ||
| description = "A little library for sweet and creamy print debugging"; | ||
| homepage = https://github.com/gruns/icecream; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| homepage = https://github.com/gruns/icecream; | |
| homepage = "https://github.com/gruns/icecream"; |
pkgs/top-level/python-packages.nix
Outdated
| executing = callPackage ../development/python-modules/executing { }; | ||
|
|
||
| icecream = callPackage ../development/python-modules/icecream { }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please attempt to sort them :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I have sorted them the best I could. Earlier when coding the first unsorted version, my first thought was put the packages ordered by name, but the list is not really sorted. Some places have a semblance of order, only to be followed by some unsorted names, and then some ordered names again... Then, as the instructions at the file beginning say nothing about sorting, I just put the names at the end. :-)
I think that to avoid this kind of confusion, if the intent is have a sorted list, that should be written on file top instructions and the out of place names be reordered. Should I open an issue to discuss about that further?
| pname = "executing"; | ||
| version = "0.4.3"; | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are no tests included. Please try to checkout from source and check if they have unit tests, and try to run them. Unit tests give a good indication that they package has a high degree of validity and correctness given the python package set.
If tests are not available, then please use pythonImportsCheck to import the most important modules. This isn't as good as unit tests, but will usually give a good indication of run-time errors.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 0 tests in 0.000s
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PyPI sources hasn't the test files. I'm using the GitHub release now.
|
Hi @jonringer! ping? |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM
Result of nixpkgs-review pr 86029 1
6 packages built:
- python27Packages.executing - python27Packages.icecream - python37Packages.executing - python37Packages.icecream - python38Packages.executing - python38Packages.icecream
Motivation for this change
Python IceCream package addition (https://github.com/gruns/icecream)
Things done
sandboxinnix.confon non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"./result/bin/)nix path-info -Sbefore and after)