could you squash your commits into 1 leaving the commit message as the version change?
btw thanks for the updates :)
other than that the PR looks good

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 398764

x86_64-linux

could you squash your commits into 1 leaving the commit message as the version change?
btw thanks for the updates :)

In previous PRs I was told that this was wrong, I had just done everything in the same commit, because in my opinion it did not make sense, and I was told that it was better to separate them. -> #378096 (review)

Yesterday the same thing happened to me with another PR, where the reviewers don't agree with the requests.

that's interesting, in those cases I'd kind of refer to https://github.com/nixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#commit-conventions
where we should split commits into different logical units, which makes sense, i.e you add yourself to the maintainers list and create a package, those should be 2 different commits but for the same package I personally don't think are separate logical units.
which also depending on the merge strategy used it may even help keeping the history a bit more cleaner although it is kind of rough with the amount of commits we have.
You could also refer to https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/README.md#commit-conventions for pkgs

you add yourself to the maintainers

well, I honestly don't know what steps to take lately. Contributing to the community is becoming increasingly tedious. One reviewer tells you one thing, another tells you another.

You can clearly analyze the other PR, and I was instructed to separate the commits by refactors. I understand perfectly what “Contributing” says about “conventional commits”. But I don't see that the reviewers agree, I even mention again what happened yesterday, a user asked me for changes, I made them, you asked me for other changes.

I don't feel comfortable every time reviewers contradict and make me reverse changes that I was previously asked to make. If the PR is wrong, I prefer to close it and move on to another topic.

I understand that feeling and im sorry you feel that way I totally agree that these "edge" cases should be agreed on or at least documented somewhere so we are all on the same page. I think all contributors want to preserve a standard and a community friendly with new comers or not so new comers, maybe we could start a deeper discussion in a github issue if there isn't one already so that way as many people as possible could give their feedback

For now I'm just going to run off to the side, I do this in my tiny spare time to contribute to the project. As an attempted contributor I feel that you (the reviewers) put a lot of “sticks in the wheel” for new contributors, I feel that our voice is simply not heard. And in the end they end up overshadowing what could be another collaborator. This is not the first case I have seen this happen, in fact I have shared this same feeling with other people who had intentions of contributing to nixpkgs, but similar issues have happened to them. Today I was even discussing the fact that each pr usually takes forever to merge. I can understand that there are “many” but there are 14 with more than 3 "approvals", and they have not been merged. There are prs with 2 approved for more than 4 weeks, without any issue or requirement about it. I hope you understand what I am trying to express. It has been a pleasure

I fully understand it, as of right now I have 1 PR with 2 approvals waiting to be merged for a month or so, I usually just try to give light reviews with things that could be done better to my understanding and based on my experience trying to contribute to this repo.
about PR's taking time to be merged I think it's something we all agree on in the end there's not many comitters/mergers to a lot of contributors/maintainers

Here's my proposal to avoid this kind of thing: #400934

With this clarification of guidelines, this PR here should be undoubtedly fine with its three independent commits.