On വെള്ളി 02 മാർച്ച് 2018 09:57 വൈകു, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > I generally read team policies with an implicit "...as long as it > doesn't conflict with the general Debian Policy". > > Specifically, I read the "should" in above quote as "in most cases, but > not a "must". > > We have in the Javascript team an old practice of avoiding duplicate > code: When code is same for Browsers and Nodejs, we ship the code in the > libjs-* package and have that package "Provides: " the nodejs package.
But it seems node-backbone is in exactly same situation as node-three (and I'm sure there would be more such cases already in the archive). Instead of using a symlink, you chose to duplicate the file in both packages. md5sum /usr/share/javascript/backbone/backbone.js /usr/lib/nodejs/backbone/index.js 8a8d829617513f36185a0ab055d088ec /usr/share/javascript/backbone/backbone.js 8a8d829617513f36185a0ab055d088ec /usr/lib/nodejs/backbone/index.js Should we remove node-backbone binary and convert it to provides? And also do the same for all such cases?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
