Skip to content

skim: fix vim-plugin output #83915

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 2, 2020
Merged

skim: fix vim-plugin output #83915

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 2, 2020
+16 −0

Conversation

tsaeger
Copy link
Contributor

@tsaeger tsaeger commented Apr 1, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Motivation for this change

skim has both a utility and vim-plugin (skim.vim)
The vim-plugin is split where part of it is installed by skim, the rest is installed by skim.vim.
This is very similar to fzf and fzf.vim. In fact, skim.vim is a fork of fzf.vim.

Add vimPlugin.skim-vim which depends on vimPlugin.skim.

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.

Sorry, something went wrong.

@tsaeger
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsaeger commented Apr 1, 2020

@dywedir review?

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

@GrahamcOfBorg eval

@tsaeger tsaeger force-pushed the tsaeger/skim-fix-vim-plugin branch 2 times, most recently from 4afd45a to 087b942 Compare April 2, 2020 16:00
@tsaeger tsaeger requested a review from jonringer as a code owner April 2, 2020 16:00
@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from dywedir April 2, 2020 16:38
@tsaeger tsaeger force-pushed the tsaeger/skim-fix-vim-plugin branch from 087b942 to a56a24c Compare April 3, 2020 14:46
@tsaeger
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsaeger commented Apr 11, 2020

Thinking I might re-rework this. Keep the "vim" outputs path in "skim".
Keep vimPlugins.skim and just merely add vimPlugins.skim-vim.

@tsaeger tsaeger force-pushed the tsaeger/skim-fix-vim-plugin branch from a56a24c to f5a54f4 Compare April 11, 2020 16:19
@ofborg ofborg bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1 and removed 10.rebuild-darwin: 1 10.rebuild-darwin: 1-10 labels Apr 11, 2020
jonringer
jonringer reviewed Apr 13, 2020
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.

there should also be an entry in vim-plugin-names

@jonringer
Copy link
Contributor

please follow https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/doc/languages-frameworks/vim.section.md#adding-new-plugins-to-nixpkgs

@tsaeger tsaeger force-pushed the tsaeger/skim-fix-vim-plugin branch from f5a54f4 to 991221f Compare April 13, 2020 16:13
@tsaeger
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsaeger commented Apr 13, 2020

@jonringer thanks for the link! I've fixed the pr to include entry in vim-plugin-names.

@8573
Copy link
Contributor

8573 commented Aug 2, 2020

What more needs to be done for this to be merged?

@Mic92 Mic92 merged commit f50b820 into NixOS:master Aug 2, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jonringer jonringer

@dywedir dywedir

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
6.topic: vim 8.has: clean-up 8.has: package (new) This PR adds a new package 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin 10.rebuild-linux: 1-10 10.rebuild-linux: 1
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@tsaeger @jonringer @8573 @Mic92