python312Packages.pygatt: 4.0.5 -> 5.0.0, python312Packages.meshtastic: 2.3.11 -> 2.3.14

[fabaff]

Diff: peplin/pygatt@refs/tags/v4.0.5...v5.0.0

Changelog: https://github.com/peplin/pygatt/blob/v5.0.0/CHANGELOG.rst

Description of changes

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.

[fabaff]

Result of nixpkgs-review pr 332660 run on x86_64-linux 1

16 packages built:

• python311Packages.meshtastic
• python311Packages.meshtastic.dist
• python311Packages.modbus-tk
• python311Packages.modbus-tk.dist
• python311Packages.pygatt
• python311Packages.pygatt.dist
• python311Packages.riden
• python311Packages.riden.dist
• python312Packages.meshtastic
• python312Packages.meshtastic.dist
• python312Packages.modbus-tk
• python312Packages.modbus-tk.dist
• python312Packages.pygatt
• python312Packages.pygatt.dist
• python312Packages.riden
• python312Packages.riden.dist

[Sigmanificient]

I wanted to bring up a concern regarding PR #330688, where you requested a change about a week ago. Other reviewers provided additional arguments the same day, which left some uncertainty about how to proceed.

However, instead of following up on the ongoing discussion, you self-merged your own PR without revisiting the earlier one, which was less than a week old.

I understand you're doing tremendous work on nixpkgs, and it’s possible this slipped through the cracks. Still, this could be discouraging for contributors who are waiting for their work to be reviewed.

Taking a moment to check for ongoing discussions is important to ensure everyone’s efforts are respected and to maintain a positive collaborative environment.

Thank you for your consideration.