From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roel Janssen Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add perltidy. Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 13:10:27 +0200 Message-ID: <87lh1g5oik.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87oa6c5uty.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45457) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKOFA-0004jN-Jj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 07:10:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKOF5-0007I4-BQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 07:10:19 -0400 In-reply-to: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: guix-devel Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Roel Janssen 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 >> 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 >> ;;; Coypright © 2016 ng0 >> ;;; Copyright © 2016 Alex Sassmannshausen >> +;;; Copyright © 2016 Roel Janssen >> ;;; >> ;;; 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