argos: unstable-20230404 → unstable-2023-09-26

[andersk]

Description of changes

Required for GNOME 45 support.

• GNOME 45 support p-e-w/argos#150

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[nixos-discourse]

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-ready-for-review/3032/3103

[pbsds]

please reword the commit gnomeExtensions.argos: 20230404 -> unstable-2023-0-26

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 274134 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

• gnomeExtensions.argos

[andersk]

The previous version was equally “unstable” (note the pname change), in that there are no tagged releases at all. Amended.

[SuperSandro2000]

there is still a special symbol arrow in the commit message but we don't want to be to picky, do we?

[piegamesde]

@SuperSandro2000 since when are we against these? I am happy to use them and happy for every other person who does.

[github-actions]

Successfully created backport PR for release-23.11:

• [Backport release-23.11] argos: unstable-20230404 → unstable-2023-09-26 #275366

[SuperSandro2000]

@SuperSandro2000 since when are we against these? I am happy to use them and happy for every other person who does.

I don't know how to type those on a normal keyboard and I don't think I am alone with that. Also on mobile the standard special character keyboard doesn't contain it.
This is just a minor inconvenience when working with those commits (e.g. grepping though the history) but still makes things yet a little more complex.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if in unicode style there are at least two of those errors which are displayed very similar.

[pbsds]

Many $EDITORs seems to turn -> into →, judging by the nixpkgs git log. I consider that a lost battle and tooling will simply have to adapt.

The gnomeExtensions. prefix on the other hand was totally missed /shrug

[piegamesde]

@pbsds good catch, and sorry for that

[pbsds]

Eh, i consider the git messages at best a heuristic of what is actually affected by the change. All tooling that parse the commit titles must deal with a lot of fuzz and provide multiple fallbacks

They do however drive the thought process on how to split commits into distinct atomic changes, which did not fail in this PR.

[piegamesde]

At least getting the package name right is important though, as OfBorg will use it to know which package to build.

[andersk]

Clearly ofborg is not parsing the commit message for that. It labelled this “10.rebuild-linux: 1” without the help of a gnomeExtensions hint.

[SuperSandro2000]

Many $EDITORs seems to turn -> into →,

Which ones? How is that feature called? I am actually interested in that feature but I've never seen this before.

[piegamesde]

@andersk that's a different bit of logic, which indeed does not read the commit message. If you look at the CI for the commit, you'll see that it didn't build the package, which it otherwise would have

[andersk]

Mm okay, I do see that. (On the other hand, why? It seems like reusing the evaluation it already does would be way more robust than scraping commit messages, not to mention more scalable than spending reviewers’ limited available time checking thousands of PRs for commit message standardization. Maybe a better topic for elsewhere. I’ll keep this in mind for now.)

[piegamesde]

Yeah, I'll redirect you to the true experts in #ofborg:nixos.org on matrix

[pbsds]

Which ones? How is that feature called? I am actually interested in that feature but I've never seen this before.

Baseless guess on my part, but there has to be something that does it, because it is so common.

[SuperSandro2000]

Baseless guess on my part, but there has to be something that does it, because it is so common.

Then I have never come across this and actually I don't think it is common that people use this in their commit titles. Most of them are just normal asci chars.

[pbsds]

$ git log --oneline | grep "→" | wc -l
5878

Sorry for all the pings OP