Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes:
> If packagers agree with flit, I will release a 1.9.2 that will include
> flit and solves the "1.9.1 reports version 1.9" bug.

no problem for nix either, I confirm it works fine.

-- 
Damien Cassou

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill

Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes:
> This is a bug in offpunk. I forgot to increment the number. I commited
> a change with the good number but the tag thus refer to the previous
> commit. What do you think is the best way to fix this?

I think this is a matter of deciding between:

1. This is a minor problem and users can wait until there is more to
release to see this problem fixed. Problem of this solution: users of
Nix are stuck with version 1.9.

2. This problem is important enough to justify by itself the release of
1.9.2 as soon as possible. Problem of this solution: more work for the
packagers who want to be up-to-date.

Hi,

in Nix I introduced a test checking that --version prints the version
number set in the package. This test breaks for 1.9.1:

$ offpunk --version
Offpunk 1.9

I was expecting the output to be "Offpunk 1.9.1". Is the package making
a wrong assumption or is there a bug in Offpunk?

Best

--

Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes:
> Offpunk 1.9 is now released.

thank you for the release. The Nix package is now up-to-date and
contains the man page. If you are curious, the PR is at:

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/220149

Best

-- 
Damien Cassou

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without

Hi all,

tmr-description-list allows for reusing the same tmr descriptions over
and over. I use that all the time and it is really good.

I thought we could improve it a bit by adding an optional default time
to wait for each description. I guess that many repetitive timers have
repetitive times. E.g.,

(setq tmr-description-list
      '(
        ("Stop working" :time "17:00")
        ("Check the PR built fine" :time "5m") ;; time for the CI to finish building
        "Call back" ;; no default here

Hi,

Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes:
> But I feel it would be a lot better to maintain our own upstream
> manpage.


I agree.


> Another option is maintaining a markdown file that would be converted
> to groff by packagers using Pandoc […] this is an extra step for
> packagers and I have no idea if they are willing to do it.

Hi,

Ploum <sourcehut@ploum.eu> writes:
> But I feel it would be a lot better to maintain our own upstream
> manpage.


I agree.


> Another option is maintaining a markdown file that would be converted
> to groff by packagers using Pandoc […] this is an extra step for
> packagers and I have no idea if they are willing to do it.

-- 
Damien Cassou

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill

-- 
Damien Cassou

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill

sourcehut@ploum.eu writes:
> This is it: ~lioploum/offpunk-packagers@lists.sr.ht

Thank you very much

-- 
Damien Cassou

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without
losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill