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

grpc: unroll recursive git retrieval #278188

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

zeuner
Copy link
Contributor

@zeuner zeuner commented Jan 2, 2024

Description of changes

This PR replaces the recursive fetch of the package source by non-recursive fetches of the corresponding (sub-)modules. This allows to fully take advantage of the more efficient specialized fetchers, is more robust in presence of network issues, and allows for reusing sub-modules if they don't change between updates. Furthermore, it can be a starting point for reducing code duplication caused by the sub-modules (e.g. 4 times googletest, 3 times abseil or 2 times protobuf - not even counting the possibility of just using available nixpkgs packages instead of some of the submodules).

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • 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
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 24.05 Release Notes (or backporting 23.05 and 23.11 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
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@ofborg ofborg bot requested review from marsam and LnL7 January 2, 2024 04:58
@wegank wegank added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Apr 5, 2024
@ofborg ofborg bot removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Oct 9, 2024
@wegank wegank added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Nov 1, 2024
@ofborg ofborg bot removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Nov 5, 2024
Copy link
Member

@FliegendeWurst FliegendeWurst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Merge conflict again. (Should target staging too)

Seems like a good idea though.

@wegank wegank added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Dec 10, 2024
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.

3 participants