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

[RFC] manual: rename to users and contributors manual, add some user notes … #60682

Merged
merged 6 commits into from May 22, 2019

Conversation

7c6f434c
Copy link
Member

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c commented May 1, 2019

…that should be there but don't fit in any chapter

Motivation for this change

Answering questions about locales on non-NixOS makes me wonder why it is still not in the Nixpkgs manual.

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date (this is the entirety of the PR)
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c changed the title manual: rename to users and contributors manual, add some user notes … [RFC] manual: rename to users and contributors manual, add some user notes … May 1, 2019
set of locales. It is possible to build a custom set of locales by overriding
parameters `allLocales` and `locales` of the package.

## Unfree software
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is going to make a lot of new users, who struggle to figure this out, lives a lot easier 👍

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Initially I tried to also explain the reasons for the default state (not even visible to search), but decided that I don't want to give the remarks on unfree software too much prominence…

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that's a good call. The documentation itself should remain neutral and just serve to inform.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm there's also some stuff about allowUnfree at https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/manual/#chap-packageconfig

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 don't think rationale should never be explained (there are technical reasons), but I had various non-neutral goals about appearance of that paragraph (I wanted it to be slightly negative and not too prominent — to reflect the attitudes evident in the relevant discussions)

NixOS manual describes the setting in context of NixOS configuration (and it only affects NixOS evaluation there…), Nixpkgs manual should cover the setting in the context of Nixpkgs configuration for use via other means.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, it wasn't explicitly linked to #17126

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
---
title: Package-specific notes
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I feel like this is very similar to https://nixos.org/nixpkgs/manual/#chap-package-notes?

See the intro

This chapter contains information about how to use and maintain the Nix expressions for a number of specific packages
such as the Linux kernel or X.org.

Any reason why the notes here don't belong there and warrants its own new chapter?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oops, I haven't read the manual since forever (yo can only trust source code!), so I skimmed the chapter list and missed that.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

On the other hand, I think the package notes are a mess right now, as there is no separation between notes of type «this is how you update X.org» and «this is how you use Steam»

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can totally understand that, but the notes do have to go somewhere appropriate in the manual and it would be the best place their is currently. But a restructuring is needed as you said.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I did miss the preexisting section initially.

Actually, maybe it should be split with package use notes going closer to the beginning and package editing notes staying after all the explanations of package writing?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually, maybe it should be split with package use notes going closer to the beginning and package editing notes staying after all the explanations of package writing?

Subsections like that could help, yes.

# Packages Notes:

## Using packages
[explanation/intro]

## Writing packages
[explanation/intro]

If I'm understanding correctly?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No. «Using packages» should be before the detailed walkthrough os stdenv code; «Updating speciric packages» should obviously be after all the generic explanations…

@7c6f434c
Copy link
Member Author

OK, implemented my plan about redistribution between user notes and development notes.

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c requested a review from grahamc May 16, 2019 12:27
@chreekat
Copy link
Contributor

Great idea!

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c requested review from zimbatm and ryantm May 20, 2019 17:36
<chapter xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xml:id="package-specific-user-notes">
<title>Package-specific usage notes</title>
<para>
This chapters includes some notes
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
This chapters includes some notes
These chapters includes some notes

<para>
All users of Nixpkgs are free software users, and many users (and
developers) of Nixpkgs want to limit and tightly control their exposure to
unfree software. At the same many users need (or want) to run some specific
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
unfree software. At the same many users need (or want) to run some specific
unfree software. At the same time, many users need (or want) to run some specific

<para>
Steam is distributed as a <filename>.deb</filename> file, for now only as
an i686 package (the amd64 package only has documentation). When unpacked,
it has a script called <filename>steam</filename> that in ubuntu (their
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
it has a script called <filename>steam</filename> that in ubuntu (their
it has a script called <filename>steam</filename> that in Ubuntu (their

<title>Basic usage</title>

<para>
The tarball archive needs to be downloaded manually as the licenses
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
The tarball archive needs to be downloaded manually as the licenses
The tarball archive needs to be downloaded manually as the license

@7c6f434c
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you

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

4 participants