Jelle Licht writes: Hi Jelle!
> As one of these people living in the "real world", this is exactly how > I have been using the importer up till now. I like and agree with > most of your changes as they make the code much more robust in the > face of inevitable failure. Great! > Nonetheless, one could say that we should not make it too easy to > inadvertently create package specifications for 'binaries'. Is the --binary flag not obvious enough? Do you have a suggestion? > One tiny improvement might be to use `spdx-string->license` from (guix > import utils), instead of duplicating this effort in the npm importer. That sounds like an improvement, would you like to help with that? > How would you propose we get to reviewing your code? Would you care to > send some patches, or should we bother you via gitlab a bit more? I think review should be done here, with patches. I thought it might be just a bit too early for that and was hoping others [you] would want to make some changes first...and maybe pulling my git would be handier then. I'm happy to send the patches here, whatever is convenient. Greetings, janneke -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl
