Conflicts in luaPackages.luarocks-nix:
- 8b563cd9f9 switched to the new version format (prefixed by 0 since there was no relevant last tag in the branch).
bc4f6fa543 bumped version and switched to the new version format. But the tag used is not part of the branch the commit comes from (master).
Used the new version but replaced the tag prefix with 0.
- b73ec84b9e removed meta (it is already set in the overridden luarocks). But that would cause the update script to try to update the overridden luarocks (as did the previously used old.meta).
bf311d950e modified meta to fix the update script properly.
Kept the meta from the latter since it allows update script to work.
This is a breaking change that converts the 'src' csv column (a git URI) to a 'rockspec'
fullpath uri.
before this, luarocks-nix would clone the repo and look for rockspecs
with a brittle algorithm. This removes the ambiguity on which rockspec
to package while allowing to remove a bunch of brittle code from
luarocks-nix.
This reverts commit e827697fd3.
This seems to cause various issues during system activation, as reported
in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/302771 for example.
Due to being close to branchoff, revert this for now.
We'll open a tracking issue to collect and sort out remaining issues.
The idea behind that is to enable users and developers of
downstream tools such as home-manager to test Nix master for several
reasons:
* Nix is currently trying to have a `master` branch that's always
releasable[1]. We're still on Nix 2.18 in nixpkgs due to too many
notable regressions. Enabling people to test latest master may help on
that end.
* This uses the most bleeding-edge Nix, but our packaging, so we can
identify issues with our packaging early.
* From what I've seen, most people are using the packages from nixpkgs
anyways instead of the upstream flake, this is far more convenient
anyways.
My plan is to update this once a week. Right now we rely on the
`installCheckPhase` here, but as soon as we have proper regression
testing[2], we may want to add `nixUnstable` there as well (however with
failures being allowed probably).
[1] https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nix-release-schedule-and-roadmap/14204
[2] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/304332
I found this while perusing the manual thinking about whether or not to install NixOS on my new laptop. It threw me for a loop for a second but as best I can tell this meant to be ".org" like the rest of the example, and not ".com"
