On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Andrew Kelley wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
>> If it makes sense to bundle multiple libraries in the same package which
>> other packages may depend on then go for it.
>>
>
> I understand. Here is an example of doing exactly this:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> If it makes sense to bundle multiple libraries in the same package which
> other packages may depend on then go for it.
>
I understand. Here is an example of doing exactly this:
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-chalk.git/tre
On Aug 05, Andrew Kelley wrote:
> What do you expect me to do? It would be very easy to just bundle all
> node_modules with the package but that is against Debian guidelines. Each
> dependency must track upstream. So that's exactly what we're doing and
> we're getting flak for it.
>
> It seems t
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
> > I've seen ITPs for a massive set of tiny-looking node libraries go
> > past on -devel in the last few months, so I thought it was about time
> > I looked at one. I'm a bit worried by what I've seen, considering
❦ 13 juillet 2014 08:50 +0100, Neil Williams :
>> > And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that
>> > Frederick pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as
>> > libraries instead of being inlined wherever they're needed?
>>
>> Because, in node, a library is cheap and the f
❦ 13 juillet 2014 11:34 +0200, Jeroen Dekkers :
>> > And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that Frederick
>> > pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as libraries instead of
>> > being inlined wherever they're needed?
>>
>> Because, in node, a library is cheap and the
At Sun, 13 Jul 2014 09:26:38 +0200,
Vincent Bernat wrote:
>
> ❦ 12 juillet 2014 23:08 +0100, Steve McIntyre :
>
> > And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that Frederick
> > pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as libraries instead of
> > being inlined wherever they'r
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 09:26:38 +0200
Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 12 juillet 2014 23:08 +0100, Steve McIntyre :
>
> > And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that
> > Frederick pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as
> > libraries instead of being inlined wherever they're
❦ 12 juillet 2014 23:08 +0100, Steve McIntyre :
> And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that Frederick
> pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as libraries instead of
> being inlined wherever they're needed?
Because, in node, a library is cheap and the functionality g
kapo...@melix.org wrote:
>Le samedi 12 juillet 2014 à 12:03 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
>>
>> Right. Did you discuss that with ftpmaster or anybody else outside of
>> the javascript team? There's typically been a consensus against very
>> small packages containing just a single script or pie
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
>On 12 July 2014 15:15, Michael Banck wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
>>>
>>> But, after discussing this in JavaScript team we ended up that it is
>>> better have separated packages, instead of having a big
>>> "nodejs-common" (or wha
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:12:17 +0200
Leo Iannacone wrote:
> >> > Am I missing something, or is the working code in this package
> >> > really just 111 lines? Why isn't this bundled up into something
> >> > more reasonable in size for the packaging system?
> >>
> >> No,
> >> you're right. It is real
Hi,
Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-07-12 19:19:16)
> I'd really like to see us solve this problem by figuring out a better
> metadata distribution system (and IIRC some progress was made on that
> front recently) than in making life more difficult for packagers.
which progress is that?
With bootstra
Frederic Peters writes:
> Indeed, I also recently looked at some, but didn't speak about it; just
> like we have LaTeX packages including a serie of CTAN packages, I
> believe it would make sense to have the same sort of thing for node.js
> modules.
The CTAN case is a little bit different, as I
Steve McIntyre writes:
> Right. Did you discuss that with ftpmaster or anybody else outside of
> the javascript team? There's typically been a consensus against very
> small packages containing just a single script or piece of code so small
> that the packaging metadata is going to be as big as (
On 12 July 2014 15:15, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
>> On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> > l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
>> >>Package: wnpp
>> >>Severity: wishlist
>> >>Owner: Leo Iannacone
>> >>X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debi
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
> On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
> >>Package: wnpp
> >>Severity: wishlist
> >>Owner: Leo Iannacone
> >>X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> >>
> >>* Package name: node-ms
> >> Ver
Le samedi 12 juillet 2014 à 12:03 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
> >On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >>
> >> tack:~/debian/ms.js$ wc -l index.js
> >> 111 index.js
> >>
> >> Am I missing something, or is the working cod
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
>On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>>
>> tack:~/debian/ms.js$ wc -l index.js
>> 111 index.js
>>
>> Am I missing something, or is the working code in this package really
>> just 111 lines? Why isn't this bundled up into somet
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> I've seen ITPs for a massive set of tiny-looking node libraries go
> past on -devel in the last few months, so I thought it was about time
> I looked at one. I'm a bit worried by what I've seen, considering
> typical discussions in the past about really small packages.
>
>
On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
>>Package: wnpp
>>Severity: wishlist
>>Owner: Leo Iannacone
>>X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>>
>>* Package name: node-ms
>> Version : 0.6.2
>> Upstream Author : Guillermo Rauch
>>* URL :
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
>Package: wnpp
>Severity: wishlist
>Owner: Leo Iannacone
>X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
>* Package name: node-ms
> Version : 0.6.2
> Upstream Author : Guillermo Rauch
>* URL : https://github.com/guille/ms.js
>* License : Exp
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Leo Iannacone
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-ms
Version : 0.6.2
Upstream Author : Guillermo Rauch
* URL : https://github.com/guille/ms.js
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: JavaScript
23 matches
Mail list logo
