reword description for the fetch-tree experimental feature

without knowing a lot of context, it's not clear who "we" are in that
text. I'm also strongly opposed to adding procedural notes into
a reference manual; it just won't age well.

this change leaves a factual description of the experimental feature and
its purpose.
This commit is contained in:
Valentin Gagarin 2023-11-14 11:40:56 +01:00
parent 5910140f25
commit 3c310bde2e

View file

@ -80,12 +80,11 @@ constexpr std::array<ExperimentalFeatureDetails, numXpFeatures> xpFeatureDetails
.description = R"( .description = R"(
Enable the use of the [`fetchTree`](@docroot@/language/builtins.md#builtins-fetchTree) built-in function in the Nix language. Enable the use of the [`fetchTree`](@docroot@/language/builtins.md#builtins-fetchTree) built-in function in the Nix language.
`fetchTree` exposes a large suite of fetching functionality in a more systematic way. `fetchTree` exposes a generic interface for fetching remote file system trees from different types of remote sources.
The [`flakes`](#xp-feature-flakes) feature flag always enables `fetch-tree`. The [`flakes`](#xp-feature-flakes) feature flag always enables `fetch-tree`.
This built-in was previously guarded by the `flakes` experimental feature because of that overlap.
This built-in was previously guarded by the `flakes` experimental feature because of that overlap, Enabling just this feature serves as a "release candidate", allowing users to try it out in isolation.
but since the plan is to work on stabilizing this first (due 2024 Q1), we are putting it underneath a separate feature.
Once we've made the changes we want to make, enabling just this feature will serve as a "release candidate" --- allowing users to try out the functionality we want to stabilize and not any other functionality we don't yet want to, in isolation.
)", )",
}, },
{ {