~ianmjones

Somerset, UK

https://ianmjones.com

Always developing.

~ianmjones/snippetpixie-discuss

Last active 8 months ago

~ianmjones/snippetpixie-announce

Last active 8 months ago
View more

Recent activity

[PATCH nova] Use go-gemini v0.2.3 30 days ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~adnano/public-inbox

---
 go.mod | 2 +-
 go.sum | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/go.mod b/go.mod
index 248fa26..59932f4 100644
--- a/go.mod
+++ b/go.mod
@@ -3,6 +3,6 @@ module nova
go 1.16

require (
	git.sr.ht/~adnano/go-gemini v0.2.1
[message trimmed]

Re: Referencing/closing tickets in commit messages not working? 2 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

And just to put a bow on it, a re-test of the private repo with private
tracker with both now referenced in a private project worked too.

Ian

Re: Referencing/closing tickets in commit messages not working? 2 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Oops, no, this repo and traker didn't have a project (it does now). 🤦

I just did another test with the repo that I previously used and that
already has a project, and it worked, thanks!

Cheers,

Ian

Re: Referencing/closing tickets in commit messages not working? 2 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Hey Adnan,

I just gave it a go, pushing to a `develop` branch on a private repo, it
didn't close the referenced ticket in the private tracker.

Just in case the feature only works for the default branch, I then
merged `develop` into `master` locally and pushed to sr.ht. This too did
not result in the ticket getting closed. 🤷

Am I doing something wrong?

Cheers,

Ian

Re: Referencing/closing tickets in commit messages not working? 3 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

Hmm, I think maybe we're at the point of needing to create a ticket?

Do you agree Drew?

If so, which tracker, git.sr.ht, todo.sr.ht, or somewhere else?

Thanks,

Ian

Re: Referencing/closing tickets in commit messages not working? 3 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

I tried this feature for the first time today, and it did not work for me either.

Both the git repo and tracker are in my account.

My commit[1] message was as follows, finishing with an "Implements: ..." line:

~~~
Complete Add Snippet screen.

This includes validating a new abbreviation before allowing it to be added.

Implements: https://todo.sr.ht/~ianmjones/snippetpixie/14
~~~

Re: Tag 0.3.0? 3 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~adnano/kiln-discuss

Awesome, thanks Adnan!

Ian

Tag 0.3.0? 3 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~adnano/kiln-discuss

Hi Adnan,

I was just wondering, do you think kiln 0.3.0 is ready for release?

Selfishly, I'd love to see kiln 0.3.0 tagged so that it would eventually 
update the nixpkgs version, currently at 0.2.1. At the moment I have to 
use an overlay on NixOS to use 0.3.0, which is a little clunky in 
comparison to using a released version.

If there's anything blocking 0.3.0 being released, is there anything I 
can do to help?

Cheers,

Re: Seeking feedback for kiln 0.3.0 5 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~adnano/kiln-discuss

Hey Adnan,

I've been using kiln via the master branch for a long time now. So over
the last few months I've used everything proposed for 0.3.0, right up
to having just published with 0.3.0-alpha-1-g3e1683e.

I've been building/installing it locally, and via builds.sr.ht when
publishing.

Everything has been working great, once I completed the updates to my
templates needed for the changes of course. 😉

So it's a big thumbs up from me for 0.3.0! 👍

Re: [scdoc] proposals/discussion for adding new syntax 10 months ago

From Ian M. Jones to ~sircmpwn/public-inbox

On Wed, 2021-10-06 at 08:19 +0200, Drew DeVault wrote:
> On Tue Oct 5, 2021 at 10:10 PM CEST, Sebastian wrote:
> > There is one detail to work out though:
> > in Markdown, inline literal text can be surrounded by any number of
> > backticks. So `this` is valid, and so is ``this``. The latter
> > allows for
> > a single backtick to be embedded inside the literal text;
> > ``something like ` this``. Is such a feature worth implementing in
> > scdoc? One part of me wants to say no, to simplify the
> > implementation.
> > But this is the only way I can think of to allow literal backticks
> > inside the text, so it may be necessary if that is desirable.
> 
> I have no strong opinions, either we could use `...` and prohibit