1) Building with the sandbox enabled is the standard on Linux,
so it is of little relevance with distribution they are using.
Because of this, we now specify "Linux" instead of "NixOS",
and the sandbox checkbox specifies "non-Linux".
2) aarch64 is a much more common platform, so we add two separate
checkboxes for both aarch64-linux and aarch64-darwin.
3) The platform names now match what is actually used by Nix.
By generalizing the previous merge-staging action we can support a large
number of branch pairs that need to be merged periodically.
Provide two intervals, daily and every six hours, to accomodate
different needs.
Co-Authored-By: Malte Brandy <malte.brandy@maralorn.de>
I am maintaining out-of-tree PHP expressions (https://github.com/fossar/nix-phps)
so I would like to get notified of changes of the code I depend on,
even though I cannot commit to becoming a PHP maintaintainer at the moment.
If "backport <branch>" label is applied to a PR,
once the PR is merged, github-actions bot will create another PR targeting
<branch> and cherry-picking commits.
CODEOWNERS files always take that *last* match for a specific match.
Having two lines for the same path will only ever result in the last
line being used. The intention here was that both of these individuals
are owners of the neovim space and not just one.
Remove elements of the PR template that have a low signal/noise ratio,
and add one that I think would have a good signal/noise ratio.
-----
Remove:
Determined the impact on package closure size (by running `nix path-info
-S` before and after)
-----
Rationale:
This is rarely done in practice, and apart from for specific packages
this is usually not a good indicator of anything useful
It might make sense to re-introduce it with two holes to fill, but then
we would have to make a serious decision to never land without these two
numbers filled in or with too big a regression, because in practice this
box has been a no-op in many cases.
Maybe just integrating this check in nixpkgs-review would bring the most
benefit here?
-----
-----
Remove:
Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
-----
Rationale:
This is fuzzy, “relevant documentation” is way too often hard to find
-----
-----
Add:
Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
-----
Rationale:
This is way too often forgotten, and is also a self-contained easy task
-----
If I receive the mail notification that staging(-next) merge failed,
I either need to check `git log staging-next` or click the action run link
to find out where should I resolve the conflict.
To save time, let’s include the information about which step failed right in the comment.
release-haskell.nix is intended to be a replacement for
https://github.com/peti/ci/blob/master/haskell-nixpkgs.nix
which is currently the main expression for the haskell-updates jobset
on hydra (in the nixpkgs project).
It has the same jobs as the old haskell-nixpkgs.nix file:
* haskellPackages.*
* haskell.compiler.*
* Some extra haskell packages for certain compilers
The following jobs are new:
* tests.haskell.*
* A manually maintained list of top-level haskell packages (most of them
using justStaticExecutables)
* An aggregate job which is intended to aid merging the haskell-updates
branch: It holds an arbitrary list of haskell-related packages and
tests we intend have working at all times. This is still somewhat
incomplete and should be extendend in the future.
Additionally a lot of refactoring has been done and some unnecessary
code has been eliminated. Due to the increased set of jobs and my
ideas of convenience however, the code size has grown overall.
I've tried document the individual parts and would be happy about
feedback in general.
One future improvement could be making adding top-level haskell packages
more convenient and adding them all to the aggregate job automatically.
Peter Simons