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

Re: Bug#841099: ITP: node-has-values -- Returns true if any values exist, false if empty

Andrew Shadura wrote:
> Honestly, I’d like to object to packaging a 31 line script in a separate
> package.

These are distinct packages, with distinct version numbers, and packages
will need to declare (potentially versioned) dependencies on them.
Packaging numerous libraries in a single source package has downsides as
well, such as larger uploads any time *any* component of the package
changes, or any time a new component gets added.

I would, in general, object to packages like this *if they're not being
packaged as part of the dependency/build-dependency tree of some
other intended package*, but in general, I think we need to be prepared
to deal with upstreams that have small single-purpose packages.  I don't
think we should package the entire node ecosystem, but packaging the
subset of it needed for end-user-targeted packages seems fine.

Also, consider the ongoing issue of packaging high-level JavaScript
libraries and frameworks correctly, whose build-dependency toolchains
for processes like minimization/"browserification" have numerous
packages like these in them.  If we're going to require the packaging of
all the tools needed to build such libraries, which I absolutely think
we should, then let's not simultaneously put up roadblocks every time
someone tries to do so.

Reply to: