Re: Node.js and it's future in debian
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 03:31:02AM +0200, Carl Fürstenberg wrote:
>
> There has been an log struggle between the nodejs package and the node
> package, which is still unresolved (bug #611698 for example) And I
> wonder now what the future should look like.
>
> To summarize the problem:
> * the nodejs upstream binary is called "node", and the upstream
> developers have refused to change it's binary name to nodejs for
> debian;
> * The the hamradio package "node" shipping a binary called "node", and
> as it's so old, the developers argue that the package must ship a
> binary called "node" or breakage will occur.
> * The reason the nodejs developers want to ship the binary as "node"
> is because all programs written for nodejs all has /usr/bin/node in
> it's shebang
> * the nodejs package are not allowed to conflict on the node package
> just because the binary name is the same
>
> As I'm not a hamradio user, I'm off course biased towards letting
> nodejs having the "node" binary and let it pass to testing. But we
> must find a solution to this, as nodejs is getting more and more used,
> and developers are forced to install nodejs from source to be able to
> use it instead of install it via the package manager.
>
I was under the impression that neither package was going to move forward with
a binary named "node"
The proposal was made for a transition plan to be made then the nodejs
person quit talking/posting.
Pat
--
,-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.
> Patrick Ouellette | Start by doing what's necessary; then do <
> pat(at)flying-gecko.net | what's possible; and suddenly you are doing <
> Amateur Radio: NE4PO | the impossible. -- Francis of Assisi <
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
Reply to: