On 16-11-28 05:04pm, [email protected] wrote: > On Monday, November 28, 2016 13:32:16 Tomasz Czyż wrote: > > 2016-11-28 13:18 GMT+00:00 Profpatsch <[email protected]>: > > debian has such a strategy: > > - https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch > > That happens to not work all that well: > https://github.com/Phreedom/nixpkgs-monitor/blob/master/debian-watchfiles/watchfiles.md > > It turns out that debian watchfiles were much less reliable at getting > updates > from SourceForge, than a generic SourceForge updater. This is because naming > schemes change, devs forget to update the updater script and lots of other > tiny but important reasons.
Since we have a unified packageset written in a turing-complete language we can do a lot better. e.g. lib.updaters.updateSourceForge -- Proudly written in Mutt with Vim on NixOS. Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es May take up to five days to read your message. If it’s urgent, call me. _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
