[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add perltidy.
From: |
Roel Janssen |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add perltidy. |
Date: |
Tue, 05 Jul 2016 13:10:27 +0200 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 0.9.17; emacs 24.5.1 |
Ricardo Wurmus writes:
> Roel Janssen <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Here I have a package recipe for perltidy. The version number differs
>> from the usual scheme, but that's what the project uses, so I cannot do
>> much about it.
>
> I don’t think that’s a problem.
>
>>>From d6cc1580a362f759bbd85107435a47c0eac04954 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Roel Janssen <address@hidden>
>> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:51:58 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add perltidy.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/perl.scm (perltidy): New variable.
>> ---
>> gnu/packages/perl.scm | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages/perl.scm b/gnu/packages/perl.scm
>> index 74a47b4..e34515e 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages/perl.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages/perl.scm
>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>> ;;; Copyright © 2016 Efraim Flashner <address@hidden>
>> ;;; Coypright © 2016 ng0 <address@hidden>
>> ;;; Copyright © 2016 Alex Sassmannshausen <address@hidden>
>> +;;; Copyright © 2016 Roel Janssen <address@hidden>
>> ;;;
>> ;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
>> ;;;
>> @@ -5986,6 +5987,27 @@ system.")
>> as exceptions to standard program flow.")
>> (license (package-license perl))))
>>
>> +(define-public perltidy
>> + (package
>> + (name "perltidy")
>
> “perltidy” (as in the domain name) or “perl-tidy” (as in the tarball)?
> I don’t remember what our naming guidelines say about this. (I think
> “perltidy” is correct.)
I think they are clear on the project's name. For example, the homepage
title: “The Perltidy Home Page”
>> + (version "20160302")
>> + (source (origin
>> + (method url-fetch)
>> + (uri (string-append "mirror://sourceforge/perltidy/Perl-Tidy-"
>> + version ".tar.gz"))
>> + (file-name (string-append name "-" version ".tar.gz"))
>
> Is this necessary or can we just keep the tarball name as it is?
I guess not. I thought we had to rename the tarballs to match the
package names (so in this case, without the dash). If it is not
necessary, I will remove it from the final patch..
>> + (sha256
>> + (base32
>> + "19yw63yh5s3pq7k3nkw6nsamg5b8vvwyhgbizslgxg0mqgc4xl3d"))))
>> + (build-system perl-build-system)
>> + (home-page "http://perltidy.sourceforge.net/")
>> + (synopsis "Perl script tidier")
>> + (description "This package contains a Perl script which indents and
>> +reformats Perl scripts to make them easier to read. The formatting can be
>> +controlled with command line parameters. The default parameter settings
>> +approximately follow the suggestions in the Perl Style Guide.")
>> + (license gpl2+)))
>> +
>
> The rest looks good to me. Thanks!
Thanks for your quick response!
Kind regards,
Roel Janssen