Bug#862051: Refer #862051 to ctte
]] David Bremner
> Tollef Fog Heen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > 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 The CTTE decision in from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.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?
> To pick a nit, 3b only makes sense if 2 happens. I guess it's pretty
> likely that it will.
3. Once a new nodejs package providing /usr/bin/node is in the
archive, other packages in the archive are free to depend on the
nodejs package and use /usr/bin/node .
> I'm not sure I see (yet) why the being "allowed to depend on
> nodejs-legacy" needs to be part of the resolution.
It doesn't need to per se. We could probably get away with just
repealing the previous resolution since there's nothing else providing
/usr/bin/node, nodejs would be free to do so. However, I'm asking if it
would make sense to add it to add clarity, or if it actually muddles the
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are