On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 9:15 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:48:40PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>> > * Some Javascript modules are very small, resulting in lots of small
>> > packages
>>
>> I think we need to balance the small packages concern with number of
>> times suc
On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 02:48:40PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> > * Some Javascript modules are very small, resulting in lots of small
> > packages
>
> I think we need to balance the small packages concern with number of
> times such small packages are used.
>
> node-has was rejected recently
On ഞായര് 11 മാർച്ച് 2018 04:59 വൈകു, Simon McVittie wrote:
> The reason I suggested that restriction was to avoid having contradictory
> requirements: if node-foo is the naming convention for the module
> that lets nodejs users require('foo'), and node-foo is also the naming
> convention for a nod
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 at 14:48:40 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On വെള്ളി 09 മാർച്ച് 2018 08:39 വൈകു, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > And for executables, perhaps something like this:
...
> > * should not be named node-* without a suffix like -bin or -tools (?)
>
> I don't think there is any particular b
On വെള്ളി 09 മാർച്ച് 2018 08:39 വൈകു, Simon McVittie wrote:
> I think saying "script" is perhaps unhelpful here, because outside
> Javascript, that usually refers to something executable with #! at the
> beginning.
>
> It might be clearer to think about this in terms of libraries and
> executables
5 matches
Mail list logo
