| 28 Jul 2025 |
|  Guilherme Lima joined the room. | 20:30:15 |
| 31 Jul 2025 |
|  @unwary:matrix.org joined the room. | 00:24:26 |
| @unwary:matrix.org left the room. | 00:25:00 |
| 1 Aug 2025 |
|  Cathal joined the room. | 02:39:58 |
| 3 Aug 2025 |
 Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/430575/files#diff-1ea2c8559b007cf7ff7861872d6572a11bdb8f6a5f41754cd8e424f7dac5bf5aR59 | 12:20:49 |
| Find me at aleksana:qaq.li | aarch64-linux gcc doesn't support c++20? | 12:21:04 |
 emily | nope, that's nonsense | 12:25:32 |
| emily | but the comment was already there | 12:25:46 |
| emily | it is just being moved around with formatting churn | 12:26:04 |
| emily | in this case the formatting churn goes around conventions, meta is generally not alphabetically-ordered | 12:26:14 |
| emily | and changelog before description and homepage is just weird | 12:26:37 |
| emily | nor do build inputs go after postPatch (there is no strict convention for all of this, but if you are going to do this kind of churn, explicitly making things comply less with the guidelines in https://github.com/jtojnar/nixpkgs-hammering/blob/b0817c8269798a830bc42f58a01c7543e7c5268a/explanations/attribute-ordering.md is hard to justify) | 12:27:32 |
| emily | so "bencode: sort" should be rejected, but checking and fixing the vintage broken comment is not a blocker | 12:28:00 |
| emily | (I can comment as much if you want, but I've found that contributor a little strange to interact with so if you are already reviewing it probably makes sense for you to handle it) | 12:29:11 |
| 4 Aug 2025 |
 Randy Eckenrode | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
nor do build inputs go after postPatch (there is no strict convention for all of this, but if you are going to do this kind of churn, explicitly making things comply less with the guidelines in https://github.com/jtojnar/nixpkgs-hammering/blob/b0817c8269798a830bc42f58a01c7543e7c5268a/explanations/attribute-ordering.md is hard to justify) Is this documented anywhere as the convention to use? I’ve been grouping by phases (so build phase stuff together, etc) …. | 23:24:34 |
| emily | I don't think there's any real consensus, but I think the nixpkgs-hammering ordering is something close to what's most common (i.e. probably many packages violate it in some way or another but if you were going to write down the most consistent set of rules you could based on patterns of relative ordering it would be close to that) | 23:25:41 |
| emily | I think some things are pretty strong consensus (passthru and meta last, pname, version, src, and usually outputs and patches before other stuff) | 23:26:31 |
