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

[Backport master] tree-sitter: 0.20.8 -> 0.20.9 #288314

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2024
Merged

Conversation

Kranzes
Copy link
Member

@Kranzes Kranzes commented Feb 12, 2024

Description of changes

This is a backport of #284045 to master.

I accidentally sent it to staging instead of master after deciding with other contributors/maintainers that it should actually go straight to master.

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:
  • 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.

@ofborg ofborg bot requested a review from Profpatsch February 12, 2024 16:01
@Kranzes Kranzes merged commit a783bc1 into NixOS:master Feb 12, 2024
27 checks passed
@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 13, 2024

Self-merging a huge rebuild directly to the master branch?

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 13, 2024

What was the basis for this decision for merging directly to master? No explanation, no reference.

@alyssais
Copy link
Member

I think the decision referred to was here.

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 13, 2024

this is a blocker for neovim nightly for over 2 weeks now

Current nixpkgs master contains everything that was on staging branch 10 days ago, so I'm not sure where this "over 2 weeks" comes from.

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 13, 2024

So far I'm inclined to say it's basically the same as Emacs packages, even with a large overlap in the rebuilt package sets at a quick glance:
#276943 (comment)

@Kranzes
Copy link
Member Author

Kranzes commented Feb 13, 2024

this is a blocker for neovim nightly for over 2 weeks now

Current nixpkgs master contains everything that was on staging branch 10 days ago, so I'm not sure where this "over 2 weeks" comes from.

I don't think you understood. neovim-nightly does not build without this tree-sitter version.

@Kranzes
Copy link
Member Author

Kranzes commented Feb 13, 2024

I decided to send it to master after discussing with a couple of other nixpkgs comitters/maintainers/contributors in the Matrix channel about it. They said that if since these PRs were usually sent to master (previous tree-sitter updates) and that almost all of the rebuilds are just text editor plugins then it should be fine. I can defer though.

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 13, 2024

They said that if since these PRs were usually sent to master (previous tree-sitter updates)

Big tree-sitter rebuilds merged to master recently? I failed to find them quickly, but maybe I searched wrong
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pulls?q=base%3Amaster+in%3Atitle+tree-sitter+is%3Amerged

@Kranzes
Copy link
Member Author

Kranzes commented Feb 13, 2024

For example: #225148

@vcunat
Copy link
Member

vcunat commented Feb 14, 2024

That was in my listing. But that was a year ago which doesn't match my "recently".

I let it pass. But I'd really dislike such merges to become common, at least unless we have evidence that they really are cheap for the infra (I don't think they are).

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.

3 participants