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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 08:29:40AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> How about doing the following:

>   node package replaced by a node-legacy package that contains no more
>   than a README and a symlink node --> ax25-node, and depends on
>   ax25-node

As mentioned by Carsten Hey on debian-ctte, we should certainly keep the
same binary package name ('node') to ensure smooth upgrades for users that
already have it installed.

>   ax25-node package, which contains what node does now, with the binary
>   renamed

>   nodejs package replaced by a node.js-legacy (or a better name if there
>   is one) package that contains no more than a README and a symlink node
>   --> node.js (or whatever), and depends on node.js

>   node.js package that is the nodejs package with a renamed binary.

> and make node-legacy and  node.js-legacy conflict.

Because Node.js is a scripting interpreter, I believe there's no point in
trying to declare the package on the nodejs side 'legacy' unless there's a
committment from upstream to deprecate the /usr/bin/node name.

So from my perspective, the packages would be:

  Package: node
  Depends: ax25-node
  Conflicts: nodejs
    -- /usr/sbin/node -> /usr/sbin/ax25-node

  Package: ax25-node
    -- /usr/sbin/ax25-node
  Package: nodejs
  Conflicts: node
    -- /usr/bin/nodejs
    -- /usr/bin/node -> /usr/bin/nodejs

> So this would need package replacement, which is a pain, and an
> exception for a policy violation -- is that enough to kill the idea?

I think it's an acceptable compromise under the circumstances.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: