Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Isn't your patch about promoting that alternative name instead of the
> former? I see a loss of that (from an upstream POV) as it renders
> current documentation, books and code slightly confusing (albeit still
> working fine). What is the gain (for upstream) in promotion of the
> alternate name? Or is that part meant only for Debian consumption?
It could be documented like this:
Some systems unfortunately have a "node" command that does
something else.
Scripts wishing to refer unambiguously to the Node.js interpreter
can use the "nodejs" command instead. This manual will stick to
"node" for simplicity.
In other words, at least from the upstream POV, the nodejs synonym would
be just a workaround, just like the gmake name for "make" (except that
in this case the synonym would be available on all new installations).
Perhaps my "See also nodejs(1)" was overreaching. I think Debian
packages should prefer the nodejs name but Debian users should feel
free to use "node" when there's no risk of confusion.
_______________________________________________
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
