forked from mirrors/nixpkgs
211fee9c43
Remove elements of the PR template that have a low signal/noise ratio, and add one that I think would have a good signal/noise ratio. ----- Remove: Determined the impact on package closure size (by running `nix path-info -S` before and after) ----- Rationale: This is rarely done in practice, and apart from for specific packages this is usually not a good indicator of anything useful It might make sense to re-introduce it with two holes to fill, but then we would have to make a serious decision to never land without these two numbers filled in or with too big a regression, because in practice this box has been a no-op in many cases. Maybe just integrating this check in nixpkgs-review would bring the most benefit here? ----- ----- Remove: Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date ----- Rationale: This is fuzzy, “relevant documentation” is way too often hard to find ----- ----- Add: Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking ----- Rationale: This is way too often forgotten, and is also a self-contained easy task -----
1.5 KiB
1.5 KiB
Motivation for this change
Things done
- Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option
sandboxinnix.confon non-NixOS linux) - Built on platform(s)
- NixOS
- macOS
- other Linux distributions
- Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
- Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using
nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip" - Tested execution of all binary files (usually in
./result/bin/) - Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
- Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.