> As for the ax25 package, it has been around since at least 1994. How can you expect them to change their name?
"node" is an acceptable name for the sole binary file in the project. "node" is NOT an acceptable name for one of dozens binary files in the utility set. I just found this nice old Mandriva ax25 package: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/mandriva-prehistory/6.0/i586/index-html//ax25-utils-2.1.42a-3.i386.html /usr/bin/call /usr/bin/listen /usr/sbin/beacon /usr/sbin/node ... and 40 other less offending binaries in the %PATH%. Yes, I expect ax25-node to change their name. The same way they changed "call" to "axcall" already. On Monday, November 11, 2013 6:40:03 PM UTC+4, Andrew Kelley wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 2:49 AM, Jérémy Lal <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Hello everyone, >> >> Debian has a nodejs-legacy package that symlinks /usr/bin/node to >> /usr/bin/nodejs... >> >> Jérémy. >> >> > While I appreciate this, Debian policy clearly states that no package is > to depend on it. And it has the word "legacy" in it. So clearly the beaten > path is to use the regular nodejs package. > > On Monday, November 11, 2013 12:28:39 AM UTC-5, Mark Hahn wrote: >> >> > Let's face it, it was a little bit arrogant to use as the binary name. >> >> No, it was a simple non-arrogant mistake. Imagemagick using convert and >> several other common verbs is arrogant. >> >> > I agree with you about imagemagick. And it seems you agree with me about > the binary name "node" being a mistake. > > >> >> Having the previous small number of ham operators using "node" change >> their scripts would have been orders of magnitude easier than what is >> happening now on debian with nodejs. Don't bring debian's problems to the >> rest of us. >> >> > This is exactly the kind of arrogance I am talking about. While I agree > that the binary name "node" was equally a poor decision for the ham > operator package as it was for node.js, they've had the name since 1994. > And why was the name taken? Because it's a such a generic word. > > There are 3 parties here. > > * Debian > * the ham ax25 package > * node.js > > If you read the bug reports you see that Debian has policies to cover this > sort of thing because they've dealt with it before, and their only goal is > to satisfy users. Here is Jérémy from this thread asking the other > package kindly if they would change their name: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-hams/2010/08/msg00031.html > As Jérémy mentioned there is a legacy package in debian to try to assuage > the situation. There's not anything else Debian can do. > > As for the ax25 package, it has been around since at least 1994. How can > you expect them to change their name? > > The only party left is node.js. It's time to admit a mistake and correct > it. > -- -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
