On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 01:34:47AM +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote: > > On 02/05/2012 00:16, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > >> > >> (shrinking cc list because I think I've said too much on -devel already) > >> Hi Pat, > >> > >> Patrick Ouellette wrote: > >> > >>> I was under the impression that neither package was going to move forward > >>> with > >>> a binary named "node" > >>> > >>> The proposal was made for a transition plan to be made then the nodejs > >>> person quit talking/posting. > >> > >> I think you misunderstood before. Ian suggested a way to move forward > >> without having to rely on good faith on both sides: > >> > >> 1. "node" maintainer and "nodejs" maintainers prepare packages that > >> remove the "node" command. > >> > >> 2. Maintainer of one of the two packages uploads both. > >> > >> 3. Usual mechanisms (release team, etc) ensure that the "node" > >> command is not reintroduced. > >> > >> I think the maintainers of both packages were ok with that, but then > >> step (1) never happened. I proposed a patch for the node package that > >> does not involve removing the "node" command, and got no response, > >> except a comment criticizing me for not being a ham radio user or > >> testing it. I proposed a patch for the nodejs package that does not > >> involve removing the "node" command, and it was applied. > > > > This is what I understood, and as a maintainer for "one of the packages" > > I was waiting for information from the node.js camp (agreement, etc.). > > I think the issue here is getting the nodejs maintainers onboard. > > That would be Jérémy Lal & Jonas Smedegaard. I don't recall seeing > > either of them weigh in on the issue *ever*a (I could be wrong, it is > > late in the afternoon after a long day at work.) > > The issue was described by me and others in : > http://bugs.debian.org/597571 > http://bugs.debian.org/611698 > http://bugs.debian.org/614907 > and summed up in this thread and the previous ones. > (I added [email protected] to the Cc: because this is something that I think needs addressed at the leadership level)
This is ridiculous. You clearly show you KNOW there is a conflict if you use the binary name, ask for the incumbent to change (they refuse) so you force the issue by releasing a package with the conflicting name *anyway* > >From the nodejs side, i don't see what we can say that hasn't been said. > >From the hamradio side, we are just waiting for an experienced user to > explain how /usr/sbin/node is called, from command-line, from init scripts, > from shebangs ? > Subsidiary : > Are there any cheap radio hardware i could buy to test it in a real setup ? You would need an amateur radio license in the jurisdiction you live in. It might be easier for you to look for a local ham radio operator/club and see if they use Linux and the ax25 software. Pat _______________________________________________ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
