Re: Node.js and it's future in debian
Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> I completely agree, but apparently Node.js' upstream has changed the name
> once previously (apparently from a similar problem) and while acknowledging
> the name is generic and a poor choice refuses to consider another change.
> (According to what I can tell from the Debian discussion. I have not
> talked to Node.js upstream personally.)
The working title of Node.js was "server" for a few weeks, before
anyone was using it. When I looked that up in order to understand
what the name "node" was about (in the spirit of ) I mentioned this
factoid without making the context sufficiently clear, and I'm sorry
To avoid banging heads against the wall too quickly: I think there are
two aspects that it would be productive to discuss:
1. Which package should use the name "node" in the long term? What
can we do to ensure that happens eventually?
(My answer is that I hope that neither uses the name "node" in
the long term.)
2. What should be the state in Debian's upcoming "wheezy" release to
provide a smooth upgrade path and not surprise users too much?
(My answer is that configuration needs to be smoothly migrated:
- ax25d.conf by the ax25-tools package
- inetd configuration by the node package
- other configuration by the sysadmin, after they are notified
through a note in node's NEWS.Debian file (shown by
apt-listchanges) and the release notes
I also would hope that wheezy can include a /usr/sbin/node file
that prints a message to help people notice they are still using
it and calls /usr/sbin/axnode, but that is still under discussion.
Likewise, the Node.js needs some migration to ensure scripts
installed by Debian packages and from outside use the new name.
I would hope that wheezy can include a /usr/bin/node synonym for
compatibility until usage of it fades away, but that is still
If you disagree with the long-term goal or have ideas for a smoother
migration, that could be useful.
Hope that helps,