surfer: init at v0.2.0

[hakan-demirli]

Description of changes

Supersedes #320993

Closes #299458.
@Guanran928

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[getchoo]

Suggested change

	version = "v0.2.0";
	version = "0.2.0";

from the contributing guidelines

There are a few naming guidelines:

• The pname attribute should be identical to the upstream package name.

• The pname and the version attribute must not contain uppercase letters — e.g., "mplayer" instead of "MPlayer".

• The version attribute must start with a digit e.g., "0.3.1rc2".

[Aleksanaa]

Remember to edit commit message accordingly

[hakan-demirli]

Thanks for the review. My takeaways are. I should have:

• Used nixfmt-rfc-style not alejandra.
• Read the docs not skim.

I will open another separate PR to add myself as a maintainer. Then I will fix this PR.

[getchoo]

you don't need to open another PR to add yourself as a maintainer; you only need a separate commit in this one

[Guanran928]

Rewording the first commit would be nice,

[Guanran928]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 324637 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

• surfer

[kacper-uminski]

Contributor to surfer here. It would be most appreciated to have this merged. :) Is there anything left that needs to be done which I could help with?

[bgamari]

While this appears to build and is largely functional, any attempt to use functions involving the file picker fail with [ERROR] pick_file error No such file or directory (os error 2).

[bgamari]

While this appears to build and is largely functional, any attempt to use functions involving the file picker fail with [ERROR] pick_file error No such file or directory (os error 2).

The reason for this appears to be that the package somehow depends upon nixpkgs#gnome3.zenity for file selection. nix shell nixpkgs#gnome3.zenity github:hakan-demirli/nixpkgs/surfer#surfer -c surfer works as expected.

[Aleksanaa]

The reason for this appears to be that the package somehow depends upon nixpkgs#gnome3.zenity for file selection. nix shell nixpkgs#gnome3.zenity github:hakan-demirli/nixpkgs/surfer#surfer -c surfer works as expected.

This is because it's using https://github.com/PolyMeilex/rfd/blob/e0e725ec9a426acf7c93d9877c41e230fcee3fac/src/backend/linux/zenity.rs to open file picker. We can just wrap it with zenity.