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

Add Grayjay.Desktop.Web Flake #162

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

danthony28
Copy link

@danthony28 danthony28 commented Dec 26, 2024

I've written and tested a flake.nix for Grayjay.Desktop.Web

It's not quite up to my standards, but it evaluates as expected. You can verify this to your own satisfaction by running nix build ./Grayjay.Desktop.Web from the repo's root and digging through the result symlink. My intentions are to import this derivation as-is into the final packaged output of Grayjay.Desktop as a whole, a la cp -r ${pkgs.grayjay-desktop-web} $out/bin/wwwroot.

Tip

To the maintainers:

I'll be following the "branch stacking" convention for these flakes, so it may be more convenient to merge a different branch, which should be mentioned below.

Note

Alejandra, my formatter of choice, only added support for alejandra.toml in v3.1.0

Caution

Concerning $out/lib:

pkgs,lib.buildNpmPackage includes node_modules in $out/lib, which takes up an obscene amount of space and is afaict totally unnecesary. fixupPhase is a hacky workaround for this and I totally intend to fix it properly.

@futo-cla-pr-labler
Copy link

Please sign our contributor license agreement at https://cla.futo.org

@futo-cla-pr-labler
Copy link

Please sign our contributor license agreement at https://cla.futo.org

@danthony28
Copy link
Author

danthony28 commented Dec 28, 2024

On further consideration, I think it wise to restructure the stacked-branch scheme I had laid out. There will need to be a flake.nix in this repository's root, but there is no branch on which it can live and thus be merged into master.

I'm closing this in favor of a different branch naming scheme is all.

EDIT: I had to draw the whole thing out on a newly-acquired whiteboard, but I had my mental model backwards the entire time. This branch is fine as it is.

Which is a little embarrassing, to be honest.

@danthony28 danthony28 closed this Dec 28, 2024
@danthony28 danthony28 reopened this Jan 2, 2025
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.

2 participants