On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 7:33 AM Fabio Valentini wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 12:04 PM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
> >
...
> > - This repackaging has been pushed to F37 too. Why, if this was a F38
> > change?
>
> I agree, this is unusual.
Hi, Node.js maintainer here.
The changes I was making to F38 e
On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 12:04 PM Iñaki Ucar wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> As a brief summary:
>
> - The Node.js repackaging change [1-2] was accepted for F38.
> - Packages nodejs16 and nodejs18 were created without any review [3-4] (?).
This is fine, packages that are only alternative versions of existing
pa
On 01/04/2023 13:10, Jiri Vanek wrote:
I would heavily recomend to use alternatives for this,a nd thus
remain aligned with other major runtimes.
Alternatives can't be used on immutable Fedora versions (Silverblue,
Kinoite, etc).
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vit...@easycoding.org)
___
Hello! I woudl like to -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NodejsRepackaging#Feedback -
add, that also java is using alternatives for major versions of jdk
switching. Weahve master java - to switch runtime, and javac to switch
devel subpackages.
Man pages are also slaves to the java/javac ma
