On ചൊവ്വ 06 മാർച്ച് 2018 07:57 വൈകു, Ian Jackson wrote: > Simon is asking the same questions as I was earlier. Sorry for > posting before reading the whole thread. > > Is this going to be common ? The Javascript ecosystem has large > numbers of small packages - but do they mostly contain just JS > libraries or do they generally all contain command line utilities > too ?
Libraries are majority, but there are many command line utilities too (mocha, uglifyjs, handlebars etc). > If only a much smaller number of upstream packages have command line > utilities, then we could have the number of JS .deb packages that need > to be maintained by putting the node and browser files into the same > package. I think the following change to point 5 of javascript policy [1] has consensus now. Change, 5. should generate a node-foo binary package if the script is usable also for Nodejs to 5. should provide node-foo and install package.json in /usr/lib/nodejs/foo if the script is usable also for Nodejs. If script includes a command line tool, it should generate foo (node-foo in case of a name conflict) binary package and declare dependency on nodejs. A separate binary package should be generated if the script requires a newer version of nodejs than available in testing to facilitate proper testing migration. [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Policy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
