Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-08 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 12:41:40PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > > David Weinehall writes: > > > Wasn't the main reason (apart from the seniority argument) for > > preserving the node name for ax25 to prevent remote unmonitored highly > > important systems from failing? > > If such systems are hig

Re: Bug#614907: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-08 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-05-07 at 11:28pm, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 09:49:11PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > On 12-05-06 at 10:22am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 03:07:27AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > We have until now maintained Nodejs only in unstable be

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-08 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO Pendant le journal télévisé du lundi 07 mai 2012, vers 20:41, Philip Hands disait : >> Package: node >> Depends: ax25-node >> Conflicts: nodejs >> -- /usr/sbin/node -> /usr/sbin/ax25-node >> >> Package: ax25-node >> -- /usr/sbin/ax25-node >> >> Package: nodejs >> Conflicts: node >> -- /usr/

Re: Bug#614907: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-07 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 09:49:11PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On 12-05-06 at 10:22am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 03:07:27AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > We have until now maintained Nodejs only in unstable because > > > requests to rename axnode was met with ei

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-07 Thread Ben Finney
David Weinehall writes: > Wasn't the main reason (apart from the seniority argument) for > preserving the node name for ax25 to prevent remote unmonitored highly > important systems from failing? If such systems are highly important, should we accomodate them remaining unmonitored? Surely if th

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-07 Thread David Weinehall
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 07:41:33PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: [snip] > It also prevents a HAM from deciding to dabble in Node.js while > preserving the 'node' name for their ax25 use. Wasn't the main reason (apart from the seniority argument) for preserving the node name for ax25 to prevent remote

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-07 Thread Simon McVittie
On 07/05/12 19:41, Philip Hands wrote: > The -legacy was meant > to be an attention grabber, and perhaps to reflect a hope that at some > point in the future one or both upstreams might switch to a better name. I think "legacy" is rather misleading, since its upstream (unfortunately) doesn't think

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-07 Thread Philip Hands
On Sun, 6 May 2012 10:29:18 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 08:29:40AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > > How about doing the following: > > > node package replaced by a node-legacy package that contains no more > > than a README and a symlink node --> ax25-node, and depend

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-05-06 at 11:00pm, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > Le dimanche 6 mai 2012 21:49:11, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : > > Greetings, dear Debian developer, > > > > [replying via bugreport as I am not subscribed to tech-ctte@d.o] > > > > On 12-05-06 at 10:22am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > On Sat, May 05

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Thomas Preud'homme
Le dimanche 6 mai 2012 21:49:11, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : > Greetings, dear Debian developer, > > [replying via bugreport as I am not subscribed to tech-ctte@d.o] > > On 12-05-06 at 10:22am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 03:07:27AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > We hav

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Greetings, dear Debian developer, [replying via bugreport as I am not subscribed to tech-ctte@d.o] On 12-05-06 at 10:22am, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 03:07:27AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > We have until now maintained Nodejs only in unstable because > > requests to re

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 03:07:27AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > We have until now maintained Nodejs only in unstable because requests to > rename axnode was met with either silence or refusal with the reasoning > that axnode was more widely used in Debian than Nodejs. > Obviously Nodejs is n

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 08:29:40AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > How about doing the following: > node package replaced by a node-legacy package that contains no more > than a README and a symlink node --> ax25-node, and depends on > ax25-node As mentioned by Carsten Hey on debian-ctte, we s

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Russ Allbery
Thibaut Paumard writes: > As I understand it, Policy is broken here: if the two binaries where > installed in /usr/bin, it would be fine (Policy-wise) to Conflict. Our current Policy specifically prohibits that. See Policy 10.1: Two different packages must not install programs with differe

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-06 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Le 05/05/12 09:29, Philip Hands a écrit : > On Fri, 4 May 2012 19:00:10 +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles > wrote: ... >> Agreed. That's why my proposal was that *all* of those (Debian, >> Fedora, Suse, MacPorts and brew) did the rename, not just us >>

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-05 Thread Philip Hands
On Fri, 4 May 2012 19:00:10 +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote: ... > Agreed. That's why my proposal was that *all* of those (Debian, > Fedora, Suse, MacPorts and brew) did the rename, not just us (Debian). > It's certainly not nice to push upstream to do something they don't > want to do, but when

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Hi Patrick, On 12-05-03 at 05:28pm, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > > > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among > > hams, so much so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and > > even HTs (Handy-Talkie

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-05-02 at 05:10pm, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 08:22:05PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > > Maybe we should short-circuit this part of the conversation, since > > it doesn't sound like you're horribly interested in agreeing to > > change the name of node in the exist

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On 12-05-03 at 10:40am, Russ Allbery wrote: > Patrick Ouellette writes: > > How many people use Node.js? I had never heard of it until this > > came up, and I work in IT with web development teams. > > Relative numbers really isn't the point, and I'm sorry I distracted us > all with that. The

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread brian m. carlson
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 09:03:55AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du vendredi 04 mai 2012, vers 06:11, > Hamish Moffatt disait : > > > Secondly if node.js is usually just used via #!, I'm not sure why it's in > > $PATH at all - why not in /usr/lib? > > Neithe

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Pau Garcia i Quiles
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi Pau, > > On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 04:24:21PM +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote: >> Regarding the often-mentioned "many users run 'node script' from the >> command-line"... so what? If we can get enough distributions (Debian, >> Suse, Fedora,

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Steve Langasek
Hi Pau, On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 04:24:21PM +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote: > Regarding the often-mentioned "many users run 'node script' from the > command-line"... so what? If we can get enough distributions (Debian, > Suse, Fedora, MacPorts and brew would likely be enough) to rename the > node

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Russ Allbery
The Fungi writes: > I think this is part of the misunderstanding. If these systems are nodes > on an AX.25 network, what's being renamed (and potentially broken) is > the userspace binary which connects the machine to the network. Think of > it as if you're suggesting a rename of /usr/sbin/sshd t

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Pau Garcia i Quiles
Hi, What are other distributions doing? I've check and OpenSuse apparently lives happy with having /usr/sbin/node for axnode and /usr/bin/node for node.js. Has anyone contacted them about this? Regarding the often-mentioned "many users run 'node script' from the command-line"... so what? If we c

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Thu, May 03, 2012 at 12:39:04PM -0400, Joey Hess a écrit : > > Consider a package that contains a node.js script, which is not the > primary purpose of the package. So it Recommends, rather than depends > on nodejs. (Let's assume it uses #!/usr/bin/env node, and for the sake > of example is som

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread The Fungi
On 2012-05-04 09:03:19 +0100 (+0100), Jon Dowland wrote: [...] > So some form of access to the machine would be required to create > the problem, be it physical or remote. The same access should be > used to fix the problem. [...] I think this is part of the misunderstanding. If these systems are

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Jon Dowland
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:20:46PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 10:11:41PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > > > You also don't address the issue of a user who installs both packages > > > and now gets varying behavior depending on their $PATH - a result not > > > of

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Jon Dowland
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 02:26:33PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > One of the considerable costs involves the number of systems in place in > the ham community that are not easily physically accessible should the > upgrade/change break the system. These systems may be on mountain tops, > high bu

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-04 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du vendredi 04 mai 2012, vers 06:11, Hamish Moffatt disait : > Secondly if node.js is usually just used via #!, I'm not sure why it's in > $PATH at all - why not in /usr/lib? Neither "#!/usr/bin/node" nor "#!/usr/bin/env node" will work then. -- Vincent Ber

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Christian PERRIER
Quoting Patrick Ouellette (poue...@debian.org): > Can someone please explain to be why it is so unpalatable to > have the Node.js package in the README and in an installation/ > configuration message include the following (or similar) message: ("last minute debconf addition hater" hat ON) Please

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Hamish Moffatt
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:28:29PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > > > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among hams, so > > much > > so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and even HTs > > (Ha

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:46:09PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: > Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 16:46:09 -0500 > From: Peter Samuelson > Subject: Re: Node.js and it's future in debian > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, Patrick Ouellette , > Andrew Starr-Bochicchio > >

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Chris Knadle
On Thursday, May 03, 2012 17:28:29, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among hams, so > > much so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and even HTs > > (Handy-Talkies). > >

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Peter Samuelson
[David Weinehall] > So... A (admittedly expensive) pre-inst script that checks the > system for calls to /usr/sbin/node outside of Debian packages would > likely do the trick? That seems like a pretty big violation of the spirit, and possibly the letter, of Debian Policy. I mean, why not just t

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among hams, so > much > so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and even HTs (Handy-Talkies). > > APRS is a system for location reporting. It's also very common

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Chris Knadle
On Thursday, May 03, 2012 16:32:08, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:21:16PM +0100, Colin Tuckley wrote: ... > > What you are also ignoring here is that AX25 packet is pretty much dead > > in Ham radio. > > No, I am not ignoring the ax25 packet status in ham radio. When I pos

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread David Weinehall
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 03:34:59PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 03:09:42PM -0400, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote: > > > > It has been said many times that the impact on users will be limited > > as node is not meant to be called directly but by inetd. You and other > >

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 03:09:42PM -0400, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote: > > It has been said many times that the impact on users will be limited > as node is not meant to be called directly but by inetd. You and other > members of the ham radio community seem to feel that there would be an > impa

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:21:16PM +0100, Colin Tuckley wrote: > Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 21:21:16 +0100 > From: Colin Tuckley > Subject: Re: Node.js and it's future in debian > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > On 03/05/12 20:44, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > > &g

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Colin Tuckley
On 03/05/12 20:44, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > With all due respect, you can make the same argument for the Node.js > package to do this. Node.js is not currently in the stable distribution > while node is (apparently this does not have any bearing on the discussion). node might be in stable but

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 10:11:41PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > You also don't address the issue of a user who installs both packages > > and now gets varying behavior depending on their $PATH - a result not > > of a local administrator's action, but of the Debian package's actions. > > If

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Thu, 03 May 2012, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > With all due respect, you can make the same argument for the Node.js > package to do this. Yes, but it would not be a transitional backward-compatibility symlink. It would be a symlink that would have to remain forever and that is required even for n

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:24:00PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > So to avoid disruptions, you rename the binary in the package and in the > "postinst configure " which is run during upgrade, you add a > symlink from /usr/sbin/node to ax25-node and you display a prominent > warning explaining t

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
Can someone please explain to be why it is so unpalatable to have the Node.js package in the README and in an installation/ configuration message include the following (or similar) message: Node.js in Debian has the executable name /usr/bin/nodejs This is to solve a conflict with a package that st

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO En ce début de soirée du jeudi 03 mai 2012, vers 21:11, Patrick Ouellette disait : >> Yes, they are. But we need to find a solution that will work for almost >> every one and this solution seems to exist. >> > Can you please elaborate on the solution that seems to exist? All I have >

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Hi, On Thu, 03 May 2012, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > This is from the linux-hams list where I asked about changing the name of > node: > > "From my experience, many MANY Linux hams have customized scripts that > startup some very elaborate HAM systems. For many, these scripts > weren't written b

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 08:48:07PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO Pendant le repas du jeudi 03 mai 2012, vers 19:35, Patrick Ouellette > disait : > > >> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a > >> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen,

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Andrew Starr-Bochicchio
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > Please understand, it is not a "reluctance to undergo this transition." > I am being asked to make Debian incompatible with the previous 13 years > of functionality, and cause a significant impact on a user community. > This is not somethi

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Vincent Bernat
OoO Pendant le repas du jeudi 03 mai 2012, vers 19:35, Patrick Ouellette disait : >> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a >> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen, >> again, as the one harming a community, like this may happen in the >>

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 02:35:06PM -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote: > > So while I don't think decisions shouldn't be taken based solely on > popcon stats, I think it would be silly to think that ham radio would > be more popular than node.js. I understand you're reluctant to undergo > this transition

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Matt Zagrabelny
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 01:10:24PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: >> >> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a >> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen, >> again, as the one harming

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Carl Fürstenberg
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > > The first part I shouldn't have said, since it's really a distraction. > I'm sorry about that. > > For the second, that's what the documentation of the binary says, as > previously posted to this thread.  Is that not the case? > > Relative nu

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Russ Allbery
Patrick Ouellette writes: > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> That community is much smaller, and the binary isn't invoked directly >> by users, which makes the impact fairly minimal in practice. > Can you support that assertion with data? The first part I shouldn

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 01:10:24PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > > As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a > different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen, > again, as the one harming a community, like this may happen in the > Ruby community becaus

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Fernando Lemos
Hi, On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > I can find numbers of potential node users by examining the number of > active amateur radio licenses and make educated guesses as to how many > may be using the ham radio node software as either a user of the system > or a system pro

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > That community is much smaller, and the binary isn't invoked directly by > users, which makes the impact fairly minimal in practice. > Can you support that assertion with data? I'm not talking installed instances in Debian, but i

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:08:23AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Thomas Goirand writes: > > On 05/02/2012 06:00 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: > > >> and the binary isn't invoked directly by users > > > If the binary isn't invoked directly by the users, why do we have a > > problem? Why can't a patch

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Joey Hess
Charles Plessy wrote: > If we would tolerate conflicts, we would not support the parallel use of some > of our packages, but there would be the benefit that the package dependancy > graph could be parsed to report clusters of mutually-incompatible packages. > Often, these incompatibilities will not

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Russ Allbery
Thomas Goirand writes: > On 05/02/2012 06:00 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: >> and the binary isn't invoked directly by users > If the binary isn't invoked directly by the users, why do we have a > problem? Why can't a patch be introduced so that the binary doesn't live > in a user accessible path (eg:

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Russ Allbery
Bernd Zeimetz writes: > If one of the maintainers disagrees with a solution you did not come to > a consensus. No, this is not true. Consensus does not mean unanimity, and the Policy dictate is (in my opinion with my Policy delegate hat on) referring to a consensus of the project, not a consens

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Thomas Goirand
On 05/02/2012 06:00 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: > and the binary isn't invoked directly by > users If the binary isn't invoked directly by the users, why do we have a problem? Why can't a patch be introduced so that the binary doesn't live in a user accessible path (eg: not in /usr/bin)? Thomas --

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Vincent Bernat
Le 03.05.2012 09:19, Bernd Zeimetz a écrit : On 05/01/2012 11:32 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Sorry, I don't understand the above sentence. Do you mean that it is impossible to come to a consensus when one maintainer of a relevant package disagrees? I can understand that claim, but it doesn't

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-03 Thread Bernd Zeimetz
On 05/01/2012 11:32 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: >> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> Wait, really? What happened to respect by maintainers for the >>> project? >> >> "The project" is not "a set of random maintainers who have a filename >

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Charles Plessy
Hi all, I think that we are asking the impossible, to be universal, cover a large number of fields, and fit all of this in a single name space witout conflicts. With our current approach, to rename at least one of the program names, we make Debian systems incompatible with outside documentation a

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 06:43:04PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > > There's also http://packages.debian.org/#search_contents which can > search for files listed within packages. > That's where I check. Pat -- ,-. > Pat

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 08:22:05PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Maybe we should short-circuit this part of the conversation, since it > doesn't sound like you're horribly interested in agreeing to change the > name of node in the existing package. :) > Actually, despite my vigorous defense of

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Russ Allbery
Patrick Ouellette writes: > I'm more than a bit disappointed that this will be the second time a ham > radio tool in Debian is forced to use a name the wider Linux ham > community does not use. No one seems to be considering the issues or > complications caused to the ham users. I've heard the

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Jon Dowland
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 05:53:54PM +0100, Wookey wrote: > Just a quick question - is there an easy way to do this? I worry > sometimes that I might be creating a binary name that is already used > somewhere, and thus a potential clash, but it is not obvious to me how > to check. Strictly this appli

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 17:53 +0100, Wookey wrote: > +++ Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 23:12 -0400]: > > Of course the #! line is not the issue. The issue is two upstream > > maintainers > > separated by years and miles selected the same generic name for their binary > > file. Compounding the issu

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Wookey > Just a quick question - is there an easy way to do this? Given most names don't explain particularly well what the command does, just use something inspired by pwgen. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Neil Williams
On Wed, 2 May 2012 17:53:54 +0100 Wookey wrote: > +++ Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 23:12 -0400]: > > file. Compounding the issue, some Debian Maintainer seeking to better the > > project by packaging additional software for the project failed to perform > > "due diligence" in researching if any

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Russ Allbery
Wookey writes: > Just a quick question - is there an easy way to do this? I worry > sometimes that I might be creating a binary name that is already used > somewhere, and thus a potential clash, but it is not obvious to me how > to check. Strictly this applies to every file in a package, although

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Wookey
+++ Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 23:12 -0400]: > Of course the #! line is not the issue. The issue is two upstream maintainers > separated by years and miles selected the same generic name for their binary > file. Compounding the issue, some Debian Maintainer seeking to better the > project by p

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread The Fungi
On 2012-05-02 14:49:09 +0200 (+0200), Bernhard R. Link wrote: > On the other hand, if renaming both of them is the only possible > outcome if both parties cannot agree, it makes it more likely both > sides will actually be willing to discuss the matter, instead of > just issuing demands, hoping the

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Jérémy Lal
On 02/05/2012 14:49, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Russ Allbery [120501 19:28]: >> I have to admit that I'm tempted to change Policy from "if there's no >> consensus, rename both of them" to "if there's no consensus, try harder to >> reach a consensus, and the technical committee decides in last res

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-02 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Russ Allbery [120501 19:28]: > I have to admit that I'm tempted to change Policy from "if there's no > consensus, rename both of them" to "if there's no consensus, try harder to > reach a consensus, and the technical committee decides in last resort." > > Most of the time, renaming both of them

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi again, Steve Langasek wrote: > [Dropped Cc; what does any of this have to do with the DPL?] I was alerting him to a conversation that was going nowhere fast, in the hope that he might use his power to participate in discussions amongst the Developers in a helpful way It has

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Russ Allbery
Patrick Ouellette writes: > Of course the #! line is not the issue. The issue is two upstream > maintainers separated by years and miles selected the same generic name > for their binary file. I agree with this. > Compounding the issue, some Debian Maintainer seeking to better the > project by

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:24:58PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 15:24:58 -0700 > From: Russ Allbery > Subject: Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > Patrick Ouellette writes: > >

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Carsten Hey
* Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 16:55 -0400]: > I was under the impression that neither package was going to move forward with > a binary named "node" Some proposed this, some agreed, others did not. In the just reported bug #671120 I wrote regarding this neither package should get the name part

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote: > Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 01:07:11 +0200 > From: Carsten Hey > Subject: Re: Node.js and it's future in debian > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > Mail-Followup-To: Carsten Hey , > debian-devel@lists.debian.org

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Russ Allbery
Patrick Ouellette writes: > On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 08:39:41PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> Node.js is becoming quite popular and is known generally to use "node" >> in its hash-bang. > Seriously? People are writing scripts that start > #!node The #! part is really not the issue, since th

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 08:39:41PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Node.js is becoming quite popular and is known generally to use "node" > in its hash-bang. Seriously? People are writing scripts that start #!node That is truely messed up! Pat -- ,

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:26:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > Contrast that with the positive actitude of the NFS developers of CITI > > at UMichi when heimdal-dev and libgssapi-dev both contained > > /usr/lib/libgssapi.a [1]. They went to the trouble of renaming libgssapi > > to libgssglue.

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Steve Langasek
[Dropped Cc; what does any of this have to do with the DPL?] On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 04:32:49PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >> Wait, really? What happened to respect by maintainers for the > >> proje

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Russ Allbery
Patrick Ouellette writes: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:26:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Indeed, and I'm very grateful for that. But realistically that was >> also a lot easier than renaming Node.js's interpreter, and I think the >> CITI folks did actually know that was coming. The conflict

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Patrick Ouellette
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 03:31:02AM +0200, Carl Fürstenberg wrote: > > There has been an log struggle between the nodejs package and the node > package, which is still unresolved (bug #611698 for example) And I > wonder now what the future should look like. > > To summarize the problem: > * the no

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Wait, really? What happened to respect by maintainers for the >> project? > > "The project" is not "a set of random maintainers who have a filename > conflict with you". Sorry, I don't understand the abov

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > I was talking about a consensus among the maintainers of the affected > > packages. Even if all but the maintainers of one of the affected > > packages would agree to a solution, there would be no way to implement > > this soluti

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Carsten Hey wrote: > I was talking about a consensus among the maintainers of the affected > packages. Even if all but the maintainers of one of the affected > packages would agree to a solution, there would be no way to implement > this solution without asking the tech-ctte or (what would be not

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Carsten Hey
* Jonathan Nieder [2012-05-01 12:57 -0500]: > Carsten Hey wrote: > > > I don't think that there ever will be a consensus in all those > > discussions without discussing in a reasonable way (which failed in the > > past multiple times). > > Note that a consensus does not imply everyone agreeing. I

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Carsten Hey wrote: > I don't think that there ever will be a consensus in all those > discussions without discussing in a reasonable way (which failed in the > past multiple times). Note that a consensus does not imply everyone agreeing. I am starting to see a consensus already and would welcome

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Russ Allbery
Carsten Hey writes: > The origin of what the policy suggests to do if there is no consensus is > a mail from Guy Maor <879142cjni@slip-61-16.ots.utexas.edu>, in > which he writes: > | That's basically a stick to force developers to reach a consensus. > Christian Schwarz uploaded this change

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-05-01 Thread Carsten Hey
* Carsten Hey [2012-05-01 01:07 +0200]: > Only Hamish, who did not respond to this issue, uploaded > node once in 2005, I need to correct myself, Hamish replied once. In <20110208230458.ga23...@risingsoftware.com> he wrote: | I think renaming the node binary to axnode is reasonable and | consiste

Re: Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-04-30 Thread Carsten Hey
* Carl Fürstenberg [2012-04-28 03:31 +0200]: > There has been an log struggle between the nodejs package and the node > package, which is still unresolved (bug #611698 for example) And I > wonder now what the future should look like. In short I think that there is only one sane solution to this an

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-04-30 Thread Igor Pashev
+1 to let Node.js be just "node" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f9ea18a.8030...@gmail.com

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-04-29 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Apr 29, Harald Jenny wrote: > Agreed but how long would it take to fix the policy vs how long would it > take to produce this package in the face of next stable release? The current situation does not even cause any practical problems, just a policy violation. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-04-29 Thread Harald Jenny
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 04:23:25PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Apr 29, Harald Jenny wrote: > > > Wouldn't this solve the whole dilemma in a policy compliant and easy > > enough fashion that it could be used or what error is there in my idea? > If fixing a real world problem requires so much o

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-04-29 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Apr 29, Harald Jenny wrote: > Wouldn't this solve the whole dilemma in a policy compliant and easy > enough fashion that it could be used or what error is there in my idea? If fixing a real world problem requires so much overhead because of policy concerns then it looks like the policy needs

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Node.js and it's future in debian

2012-04-29 Thread Harald Jenny
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 08:39:41PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On 12-04-28 at 01:50pm, Joey Hess wrote: > > Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > As I understand the current status, it has already on this list been > > > resolved that *both* packages should back off from using the > > > clashing nam

  1   2   >