On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 3:59 AM Tom Hughes <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 29/08/2019 20:01, Ben Rosser wrote: > > > Hm, does it make sense then to have a compatibility package for lodash3? > > I think we may have to multiversion it yes. Been thinking that for > a while. > > I'll try and have a look at doing a lodash4 version of the spec > over the weekend...
Great, thanks for looking into it! > > My guess is also that at least *some* of these packages have a newer > > release which support lodash 4 but no one has updated the package, > > whether because the package is effectively unmaintained or the > > maintainer is overworked or worried about breaking dependencies. :( > > Oh probably quite a lot do, it's been a bit chicken and egg having > to try and do everything at once, or even audit what is actually > doable - ie what dependants have a new version with support. Yeah, that's very fair. I've been thinking for a while now-- and this is probably a separate discussion than just grunt/lodash-- that it would be very useful to do a thorough audit of all the nodejs-* packages in Fedora and figure out which ones are outdated, which ones are uninstallable due to some other package having an unsatisfied dependency, which dependent packages are outdated, etc. I've only looked into grunt now because it breaking broke one of my packages. But it would be really nice to be more proactive here. As it is, I fear a reasonable number of the nodejs-* packages in Fedora right now may not actually be very useful... Ben Rosser _______________________________________________ nodejs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
