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

Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?

On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 09:20:31PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi Pat,
> Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> > The binary on the ham radio side is not "LinuxNode" in package "node" it is
> > simply "node" in package "node"
> >
> > Since you are still concerned with this issue, and neither side has shown a
> > willingness to change, I would say the time has come for both packages to be 
> > renamed.
> Just to be clear: both package names are fine --- it's the names of
> the binaries that cause trouble.
> Being a user of neither package, I'd actually prefer for the name of
> the javascript interpreter to stay "node" (sorry!).  It is the
> difference between needing to change the configuration of one
> superserver and needing to change the shebang line and content of many
> scripts.  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.  There's currently a release-critical bug against nodejs
> about that.

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.

Having a vested interest in the ham radio package retaining the name "node"
and pointing out the history of the ham radio package being in Debian long
before the node.js package, I want the ham radio package to retain the name.

Apparently a consensus has not been reached, or at least not one that you
recognize.  In the event of no consensus, Debian policy calls for *both*
packages to have their binaries renamed.  You even say as much in the bug
report you filed against the node package.

> Should the binary on the ham radio side be called ax25-node, or
> LinuxNode, or something like that?  Given a proposed name, I would be
> happy enough to assume I have your blessing and start sending patches
> to the node bug. :)

When you assume something..... (if you don't know the rest of the quote,
google it)

Are you a ham radio operator, or do you have another reason to be interested
in the eventual name of the ham radio package? There is currently a bug against
the ham radio package for the binary name conflict.  This is sufficient pending
the outcome of the "what package (if any) may retain the binary name node" 
discussions.  When the ham radio maintainers decide on how to implement the
fix, they will.  If you wish to join the ham radio maintainers group, we can
discuss that.



Patrick Ouellette                 pat@flying-gecko.net
ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net         Amateur Radio: NE4PO 

What kind of change have you been in the world today?

Reply to: