Le jeu. 31 janv. 2019 à 09:30, Paolo Greppi <paolo.gre...@libpf.com> a écrit :
> Il 31/01/19 01:15, Jérémy Lal ha scritto: > > ... > > Hi, > > > > i find it funny that no one even tried to solve this bug: > > both packages (python-jsbeautifier, node-js-beautify) > > have the same upstream ! > > The solution here is to provide two dpkg-alternative to > > /usr/bin/js-beautify. > > > > It's blocking postcss, it would be nice to quickly fix this. > > > > Jérémy > > I had proposed an ever quicker fix: > > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/2019-January/030590.html > which is still on my todo list. What do you think of that ? > okay then it seems it's going to be that way :| Do you want me to sponsor that upload ? > A more complex (but nicer) alternative would be to have single source > generate both the js and python package. > > Currently they have the same homepage, but different upstream tarballs. > python-jsbeautifier watches pypi: > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/python-jsbeautifier/blob/debian/master/debian/watch > whereas we watch github: > https://salsa.debian.org/js-team/node-js-beautify/blob/master/debian/watch > > Another difficulty is that python-jsbeautifier is at version 1.6.4, > whereas node-js-beautifyis at 1.7.5. > In any case both packages could be updated to 1.8.9 which is the current > non-beta version. > Okay. Maybe for buster+1 ?
