On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:28:53PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> * Andrew Shadura [Mon, Oct 17 2016, 08:23:19PM]:
> > Hi,
> > On 17 October 2016 at 18:57, Sruthi Chandran <s...@disroot.org> wrote:
> > > Package: wnpp
> > > Severity: wishlist
> > > Owner: Sruthi Chandran <s...@disroot.org>
> > > X-Debbugs-CC: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > >
> > > * Package name : node-has-values
> > > Version : 0.1.4
> > > Upstream Author : Jon Schlinkert (https://github.com/jonschlinkert)
> > > * URL : https://github.com/jonschlinkert/has-values
> > > * License : Expat
> > > Description : Returns true if any values exist, false if empty
> > Honestly, I’d like to object to packaging a 31 line script in a
> > separate package. I’d rather see a package named
> > node-jonschlinkert-modules with all modules bundled, which would
> > Provides: node-has-values, node-copy-descriptor, …
> Seriously, can we please keep this nodejs stuff out of the main repository?
> It's not like I don't trust APT guys in finding the right bullet to deal
> with thousands of trivial packages but do we really have to care about
> the costs of all that spam littering up our namespace?
I do not think insulting language like "spam" is helpful here.
In unstable there are around 3500 packages for perl modules,
and even more for python modules.
The whole JS ecosystem still being a bit immature is a real problem,
but the number of packages itself is not a problem.
I am not a fan of all that JS stuff, but I do not see any valid basis
for rejecting such packages in general.
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed