[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#862051: Refer #862051 to ctte

]] Tollef Fog Heen 

> ]] Margarita Manterola 
> > This is still true today.  However, 5 years after the initial decision, the use
> > of Node.js has kept growing to the point that it is by far the most expected
> > meaning of the word "node" in the IT context.
> > 
> > This, compounded with the fact that the old node will be gone in stretch, means
> > that it makes sense for nodejs to become node.
> I think it's unfortunate that upstream chose node rather than nodejs as
> the binary name, but think I think we should allow nodejs to use the
> node binary name.

I think we need a resolution for this.  A first draft is below,
feedback on wording and content appreciated.

=== DRAFT Resolution ===
The Technical Committee recognises that circumstances change in ways
that make previous resolution no longer appropriate.  In 2012, it was
resolved that the nodejs package should not provide /usr/bin/node due to
the historical conflict with the ax25-node package.  Node.js is still
quite popular and the ax25-node package is no longer in the stable,
testing or unstable so the requirement for nodejs to not provide
/usr/bin/node no longer applies.

The Committee therefore resolves that:

1. The CTTE decision in from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.
2. The nodejs package shall be free to provide /usr/bin/node.
3. Other packages in the archive are free to depend on the nodejs
   package and use /usr/bin/node.
 === End DRAFT Resolution ===

Should we say something about packages being allowed to depend on
nodejs-legacy for backports?

Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are

Reply to: