Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> You claim to not use either package, but yet you advocate for the node.js
> package to keep the executable name "node" - this is strange to me.
Sorry, I must have been unclear. I was only explaining my preference.
I wasn't lying. I also said:
>> However, if the only way to include both node and nodejs in
>> wheezy is for the interpreter binary to be renamed, too, that's ok
>> with me.
Indeed, renaming both is what policy (and good sense) requires in the
absence of consensus. I guess it was foolish of me to imagine that
there could be a discussion resulting in consensus based on something
other than which tool is most important! (Both tools are obviously
important in their communities.)
[...]
> Are you a ham radio operator, or do you have another reason to be interested
> in the eventual name of the ham radio package?
[...]
> When the ham radio maintainers decide on how to implement the
> fix, they will.
No, I am not a ham radio operator. I was worried because this
(release-critical) bug had received no response for three quarters of
a year. I'm glad to hear you say "when" rather than "if" here --- as
far as I can tell, you are saying that I should not be worried and
this bug is not stalled after all.
I am interested in Debian remaining useful for a variety of purposes,
which is why I want to see some proposed fix enter unstable early
enough to shake out problems so wheezy can both include fundamental
tools for ham radio operators and for web developers.
Sorry for the lack of clarity.
Jonathan
Reply to: