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
notion: 3-2017050501 -> 3-2019050101 #77855
Conversation
meta = with stdenv.lib; { | ||
description = "Tiling tabbed window manager, follow-on to the ion window manager"; | ||
homepage = "https://notionwm.net/"; | ||
license = licenses.notion_lgpl; # notion4 will be fully LGPL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This version of notion appears to be using the standard LGPL 2.1. Please change this accordingly and drop the custom one from licenses.nix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done
PRELOAD_MODULES=0 | ||
|
||
# Purity reasons | ||
X11_PREFIX="/no-such-path" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can these all not just be set buildFlags?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done
buildInputs = [makeWrapper xlibsWrapper lua gettext mandoc which libXinerama libXrandr libX11 ] ++ stdenv.lib.optional enableXft libXft; | ||
preConfigure = ''cp ${./system-local-nixos.mk} system-local.mk''; | ||
|
||
buildFlags = [ "LUA_DIR=${lua}" "PREFIX=\${out}" ]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Set PREFIX in makeFlags since it’s shared between installFlags and buildFlags.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done
Upstream here ;) - thanks for looking into this! Where did you hear about "3-20200107"? This version is not tagged upstream, and the commit packaged in this PR is the latest master. The next release from master is intended to become "Notion 4", as we have made some larger changes (https://notionwm.net/migration.html). Packaging the latest master under version '3' would be confusing. This PR is related to #70610 - I guess we should compare these and merge once we release Notion 4? |
Of course we would much welcome testing of this snapshot - as you can see at https://github.com/raboof/notion/projects/1 we're rather close to releasing Notion 4 (perhaps within the next 3 weeks?). |
@raboof , many thanks to look at us at NixOS community! In behalf of all, welcome to our repo :)
I use a script called {
"url": "https://github.com/raboof/notion",
"rev": "8d719dff20f2186a6e0c4e5cf5486da785857d5b",
"date": "2020-01-07T19:40:19+01:00",
"sha256": "1rlbhknjz4fx55lb4g7z746f32p4mxwzns244slggpr5ba51ivfg",
"fetchSubmodules": false
} By default it tries the master branch, showing the corresponding date.
My PR is a cleanup. It will make the transition to Notion4 smoother. |
license = licenses.notion_lgpl; | ||
maintainers = with maintainers; [jfb]; | ||
}; | ||
version = "2020-01-07"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems kind of weird to update this package from a released upstream tag to a timestamped git snapshot of the next (as of yet unreleased) major version introducing significant changes (https://notionwm.net/migration.html).
Thanks for not using the same version format, that does make it less confusing.
I'm not opposed to it, but my impression was that Nix prefers packaging released tags.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed, this package should be named “notion-unstable” and the version should be set to the commit date.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not opposed to it, but my impression was that Nix prefers packaging released tags.
Initially I think "well, maybe the master branch fixed the compilation issues", then I tried it before anything else.
buildFlags = [ "CC=cc" "LUA_DIR=${lua}" "X11_PREFIX=/no-such-path" | ||
# A bug in the upstream prevents it to compile | ||
# when PRELOAD_MODULES is 1. | ||
"PRELOAD_MODULES=0" ]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this can be removed: PRELOAD_MODULES=0
is already the default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Weirdly, I needed to explicitly set it as "0" or else the mysterious fontconfig DSO bug appeared.
pkgs/top-level/all-packages.nix
Outdated
@@ -20380,7 +20380,7 @@ in | |||
geoip = geoipWithDatabase; | |||
}; | |||
|
|||
notion = callPackage ../applications/window-managers/notion { }; | |||
notion = callPackage ../applications/window-managers/notion { lua = lua5_3; }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was this necessary? Notion should work fine with the current Nix default (5.2), I've been testing with that for months.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, it was a leftover of various tests.
Given that this is a release -> unreleased bump, I think it needs some justification beyond “this is a cleanup”. Is something broken with the current package? What’s stopping us from waiting until there’s a new release in a few weeks? @tftio as a fellow maintainer of this package, what do you think? |
Thanks! I've switched to NixOS myself a few months back and I'm quite happy with it, so I plan to stick around :). Great to see this interest in having Notion on NixOS up-to-date! |
Well, it required a now useless patch, and also the @alyssais now I am using the tagged upstream. What do you think? |
Well, I think it is all OK now. |
Initially I think "well, maybe the master branch fixed the compilation
issues", then I tried it before anything else.
Ah right, if it didn't compile before then this seems fine.
|
Done! |
notion: 3-2017050501 -> 3-2019050101 (cherry picked from commit 45b4008)
Motivation for this change
Update package.
Things done
sandbox
innix.conf
on non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
./result/bin/
)nix path-info -S
before and after)