On 0, Carl Fürstenberg <azat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So for now, i guess conflicting with "node" package is the only alternative. > > However, i doubt it will be accepted. Do this reason for a conflict have > > already > > been accepted in the archive ? > >
No. In this case, the two binaries have completly different purposes. So, using a conflict is not appropriate in this case. Besides, "node" is a generic term and it's really not appropriate as a filename used in /bin. > > [0] > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/08/msg00568.html > > [1] > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-hams/2010/08/msg00031.html > > > > Don't know if it's a valid source, but according to popcon, "nodejs" > http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=nodejs is more popular now > than "node" http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=node > It's a valid source for such data, but cannot be considered as an argument since they seem to have almost the same popcon. Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
