liberfa: init at 1.7.0 #79842
liberfa: init at 1.7.0 #79842
Conversation
|
There's still a syntax error in the maintainers list - see https://gist.github.com/GrahamcOfBorg/3bc52c87ed258789eb1d181c42a1d7e2 - an updated link will be in the "Details" button of the PR. |
| meta = with stdenv.lib; { | ||
| description = "A C library containing key algorithms for astronomy, and is based on the SOFA library published by the International Astronomical Union (IAU)."; | ||
| homepage = "https://github.com/liberfa/erfa"; | ||
| license = "https://github.com/liberfa/erfa/blob/master/LICENSE"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
license should not be a link to the license file. Again, see https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/manual/#sec-standard-meta-attributes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, then it shall be free as far as I can judge ERFA's license, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@timokau that license doesn't seem "standard", or like one of those available in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/lib/licenses.nix . The manual says:
[..] or in-place license description of the same format if the license is unlikely to be useful in another expression.
Though I don't see a way to specify a "description" of this license - it starts with a Copyright (C) 2013-2014, NumFOCUS Foundation. but after reading more it feels like it's a Free software...
I did a git grep 'license =' | grep LICENSE and there are some derivations that use a straight link to upstream's license, and some use license.free along with a comment to upstream's license file. Personally I like the approach of a straight link as it's parseble by Nix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@doronbehar technically parsable with nix yes, but a URL doesn't provide much practical value when parsed with nix. free would actually be more valuable, since you could at least sort packages on whether they're free/unfree.
I think with "of the same format" it is meant that you should just define a license attrset inline. That could for example be modeled after this entry in licenses.nix:
epson = {
fullName = "Seiko Epson Corporation Software License Agreement for Linux";
url = "https://download.ebz.epson.net/dsc/du/02/eula/global/LINUX_EN.html";
free = false;
};There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the advice. I'll put it into next commit.
|
your PR should have eventually two commits: |
|
The diff looks good (though it may be a good idea to keep the In case you're not familiar with the workflow, see Situation 3 in https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2018/06/07/keeping-git-commit-history-clean/. |
|
@timokau I removed the |
|
Yeah, that's a valid point. It could still be nice to have some kind of a name, for example if you wanted to have a listing of nixpkgs packages with their licenses. Leaving it out is reasonable too though. Thanks for your patience & responsiveness :) Looks good to me now. |
|
Congrats on your first commit and your first package :) Welcome to the team! |
|
Thank you @timokau ! |
Motivation for this change
Things done
sandboxinnix.confon non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"./result/bin/)nix path-info -Sbefore and after)