Improvement of Note on Fetchers #1191
Conversation
…ers and nixkgs fetchers are not the same
hsjobeki
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a lgtm improvement.
However we should be more concrete.
- "more optimized evaluation" -> optimized how? For what use case? This is too vague.
- "differ in some aspects" -> which aspects? Same problem.
This should be more concrete.
Suggestion: highlight the most important difference. Paused eval i assume.
For the rest place a reference to the manual.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Thanks for the feedback @hsjobeki. I have chosen to highlight the additional hash argument in the nixpkgs fetchers. That will also make them recognizable and is probably the most apparent difference for anyone not too deep into the details. Feel free to give me additional feedback if you think something could be better :) |
Co-authored-by: Johannes Kirschbauer <[email protected]>
|
Your suggestions read much better @hsjobeki . I will take the tips and try to write better next time. |
I wanted to make this change to emphasize the difference between the builtin fetchers and the nixpkgs fetchers.