Change:
Describe the bug repology reports some issues with the package name and version. It should end with the version, not "staging". So we could just call the package . But we should be consistent here! All the wine versions and attribute names are messed up. wine-4.0.2 | wine wine-4.0.2 | wine-4.14 | winePackages.unstable wine-4.14-staging | wine-staging wine-4.14-staging | winePackages.staging Why is "staging" in the package name but "unstable" not? Is there even a difference? So i would remove "staging" from "wine-4.14-staging". Metadata master Maintainer information:
Adding to this: I locally built and without issues with the current packages but I'm not sure what's actually required for a PR here. Seems odd that it was so easy and nobody else already PRed it.
Mind doing the PR then? :)
I'm not sure what's actually required for a PR here. I also don't know what the wine maintainers want. My motivation is to get the repology error fixed. So i would remove "staging" from "wine-4.14-staging". Seems odd that it was so easy and nobody else already PRed it. There is a lot that can be improved in nixpkgs that is quiet easy! For example i'm currently fixing package versions that produce errors in repology. There are 586 known problems left to fix: There are 4997 outdated packages in nixpkgs unstable: Most of them probably quiet easy to update, but someone has to invest the time. Maybe there is already a PR that is not merged yet. A review can help to speed it up! But we are already the best distro when it comes to up-to-date packages! And we might supersede AUR in the future with total number of packages. But at the same time, many common packages are not in nixpkgs...
Thank you for your contributions. This has been automatically marked as stale because it has had no activity for 180 days. If this is still important to you, we ask that you leave a comment below. Your comment can be as simple as "still important to me". This lets people see that at least one person still cares about this. Someone will have to do this at most twice a year if there is no other activity. Here are suggestions that might help resolve this more quickly: for maintainers and people that previously touched the related code and @ mention them in a comment. on the . 3. Ask on the on .
issue still exists cc maintainers
There is a difference between unstable and staging. Staging is the staging patches on top of unstable.
That makes sense. Can we add it to Long description? Repology seem to recognise the version now: !
Added to description, but if you think longDescription is better, or think the wording is not clear — please comment or PR.

Discussion:
(mkBuildInputs wineUnstable.pkgArches pkgNames) ++ extra; in assert stdenv.lib.getVersion wineUnstable == patch.version; <del> stdenv.lib.overrideDerivation wineUnstable (self: { </del> <ins> (stdenv.lib.overrideDerivation wineUnstable (self: { </ins> buildInputs = build-inputs [ "perl" "utillinux" "autoconf" ] self.buildInputs; name = "${self.name}-staging";

./patchinstall.sh DESTDIR="$PWD/.." --all cd .. ''; <del> }) </del> <ins> })) // { meta = wineUnstable.meta // { description = wineUnstable.meta.description + " (with staging patches)"; }; } </ins>