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

linkchecker: unstable-2020-08-15 -> 10.0.0 #110447

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 28, 2021

Conversation

peterhoeg
Copy link
Member

Motivation for this change

Proper release with py3 support.

Cc @steshaw

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.


src = fetchFromGitHub {
owner = pname;
repo = pname;
rev = "0086c28b3a419faa60562f2713346996062c03c2";
sha256 = "0am5id8vqlqn1gb9jri0vjgiq5ffgrjq8yzdk1zc98gn2n0397wl";
rev = "v" + version;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
rev = "v" + version;
rev = "v${version}";

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I get the latter is more commonly seen in nixpkgs, but otherwise why?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we ever do treewide changes on this it would make it a lot easier to change when we don't need to think about this variant.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not really convinced. The revision is inherently specific to this derivation.

@SuperSandro2000
Copy link
Member

This is a semi-automatic executed nixpkgs-review which is checked by a human on a best effort basis and does not build all packages (e.g. lumo, tensorflow or pytorch).
If you have any questions or problems please reach out to SuperSandro2000 on IRC.

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 110447 run on x86_64-linux 1

2 packages built:
  • linkchecker
  • styx

@SuperSandro2000
Copy link
Member

This is a semi-automatic executed nixpkgs-review which is checked by a human on a best effort basis and does not build all packages (e.g. lumo, tensorflow or pytorch).
If you have any questions or problems please reach out to SuperSandro2000 on IRC.

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 110447 run on x86_64-darwin 1

2 packages built:
  • linkchecker
  • styx

@peterhoeg peterhoeg merged commit eb9503a into NixOS:master Jan 28, 2021
@peterhoeg peterhoeg deleted the u/linkchecker branch January 28, 2021 04:06
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

2 participants