aerogramme: init at 0.3.0

[supinie]

Description of changes

A resilient and standards-compliant open-source IMAP server with server-side encryption.

https://aerogramme.deuxfleurs.fr/
https://git.deuxfleurs.fr/Deuxfleurs/aerogramme

NOTE: This PR must be merged after #331111 where I will be added to maintainers/maintainer-list.nix. Tests are expected to fail because of this.

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.

[SigmaSquadron]

NOTE: This PR must be merged after #331111 where I will be added to maintainers/maintainer-list.nix. Tests are expected to fail because of this.

Feel free to add that commit to this PR as well. If they're identical, they should be merged with no conflicts.

[fpletz]

Since upstream even provides a flake I don't see any benefit in adding another 100kb Cargo.lock to nixpkgs.

[supinie]

Since upstream even provides a flake I don't see any benefit in adding another 100kb Cargo.lock to nixpkgs.

Sorry, this is one of my first packages and am fairly unfamiliar with flakes - how should this be addressed otherwise?

[JulienMalka]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 332674 run on x86_64-linux 1

1 package built:

• aerogramme

[JulienMalka]

Tested locally, LGTM

[fpletz]

Sorry, this is one of my first packages and am fairly unfamiliar with flakes - how should this be addressed otherwise?

Users could just import the repo or use the flake instead of adding this to nixpkgs.

[nixos-discourse]

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/2024-summer-of-nix-program-updates/46053/4