On Saturday 27 February 2016 12:29 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> ¹ bug#809977 requests adding node-handlebars to src:libjs-handlebars (to
> cover not only browser but also server-side use), but package maintainer
> chose to instead package libjs-handlebars from a Ruby bundling
> (re)source (see changelog entry for ruby-handlebars-assets 2:0.20.1-3,
> written some months after bug#809977).
>
I did not see this bug when I updated libjs-handlebars (so it was not
_instead_ of fixing).
In this particular case, maintaining one single package was considered
better than maintaining 3 source packages. If I had seen that bug before
the source packages were combined, the justification of less maintenance
would not have been there.
Adding more source package adds to the burden of maintenance. IMHO, it
makes sense to reduce source packages if there is only a ruby package
using the js package. If more packages needs the js package, then
maintaining separate source packages is justified.
And the the upload that used ruby-handlebars-assets as source for
libjs-handlebars was on Tue, 07 Apr 2015 19:51:22 +0530 but #809977 was
filed on 5 Jan 2016 01:12:12 UTC. So I don't think it is fair to say the
choosing to use the rubygem provided copy was instead of adding
node-handlebars. ("written some months after bug#809977"). No malice was
intended as is is made out to be.
I just uploaded a separate libjs-handlebars pcakage which provides
node-handlebars, libjs-handlebars and libjs-handlebars.runtime binary
packages.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature