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

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

* Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 16:55 -0400]:
> I was under the impression that neither package was going to move forward with
> a binary named "node"

Some proposed this, some agreed, others did not.

In the just reported bug #671120 I wrote regarding this neither package
should get the name part of the policy:
| The common reading of the according section does neither match what
| seems to be the original intention [1] nor my common sense.
|  [1] http://lists.debian.org/<879142cjni.fsf@slip-61-16.ots.utexas.edu>

> The proposal was made for a transition plan to be made then the nodejs
> person quit talking/posting.

Ian's proposal was as far as I understood it when reading it basically
rolling a dice and I hope that I either misread it or that it was meant
as a joke.

If the node package needs to rename the binary it obviously needs a new
name ;)  Hamish suggested axnode once, the patch lying in the BTS uses
ax25-node.  Do you have any preference in case it is needed?

Thanks for caring about this thread.


Reply to: