nixos/espanso: fix wayland option

[rawkode]

Description of changes

The espanso module recently added a wayland option which appears to be missing from the config.

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.

[jtbx]

What is this supposed to do? If it's setting the package option, one can already do that manually. In any case it just looks like it's adding an option without any logic. :)

[jtbx]

Ah I didn't see that down below, thanks.

[rawkode]

@jtbx @Aleksanaa Can we merge?

[Aleksanaa]

Also please squash your commits into nixos/espanso: fix wayland option

[rawkode]

@Aleksanaa Done

[Aleksanaa]

Please squash your commits into nixos/espanso: fix wayland option.

[rawkode]

Sorry, I missed read your message. This has been resolved.

[pitkling]

Was there a race condition between this PR and commit 7f447ce (by @michaelBelsanti)? The latter removed the mkIf that was referencing the (at the time of the commit non-existent) wayland option. Shortly after, this PR introduced the option, which now is not used at all in the current master branch.

[pitkling]

Just for completeness: The PR for the commit mentioned above seems to be PR #316519. Also pinging @n8henrie and @SuperSandro2000 who were involved in that PR.

[n8henrie]

I thought we had determined not to use a separate wayland option since the idiomatic approach is just to allow one to set package.

Sorry about missing this, I meant to add myself to espanso maintainers at some point.

[n8henrie]

I'll take a closer look later today, currently on mobile.

[n8henrie]

@Aleksanaa @rawkode @pitkling Here was the review where @SuperSandro2000 had recommended to just use the package option (without a separate wayland option), and we had worked towards removing it. Was there a reason to go back the other direction with this?

Should we have just removed the wayland option (and all references to it), since it is already configured to use the package option?

[rawkode]

I was just trying to fix the broken package. If the Wayland option has been removed, we can continue that way. I assume this was some merge race condition