nixpkgs
nixpkgs copied to clipboard
NixOS
pomodoro: init at 0.1.0
Description of changes
Things done
- Built on platform(s)
- [x] x86_64-linux
- [ ] aarch64-linux
- [ ] x86_64-darwin
- [ ] aarch64-darwin
- [ ] For non-Linux: Is
sandbox = trueset innix.conf? (See Nix manual) - [ ] 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
- [x] 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 - [x] Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in
./result/bin/) -
22.11 Release Notes (or backporting 22.05 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
- [ ] (Release notes changes) Ran
nixos/doc/manual/md-to-db.shto update generated release notes
- [X] Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.
Just my 5c, I know that the project name is Pomodoro, but it just feels weird having such small utility taking ownership of the pomodoro attribute, given that Pomodoro is a general name for the process itself.
Maybe pomodoro-rs?
I kind of understand your concern but also there's no other package named pomodoro and pomodoro-rs is not the name of the program. If there's gonna be another rust pomodoro package we'll have a problem too.
Well, as you forked it, renaming the project to pomodoro-rs would be possible. The name of the binary can still be pomodoro.
OTOH we also allowed a similar namespace-cluttering with exa or gobang (the latter being neither written in Go nor related to the board game).
