Le mardi, 29 août 2017, 12.32:19 h CEST Sam Hartman a écrit :
> >>>>> "Thorsten" == Thorsten Glaser <t.gla...@tarent.de> writes:
> Thorsten> Hi,
> >> * Restore /usr/bin/node following CTTE #862051 Let's try to drop
> >> /usr/bin/nodejs before buster. Replaces and Conflicts
> >> nodejs-legacy. Closes: #754462.
> Thorsten> please do NOT completely replace an ABI between releases.
> Thorsten> Leave /usr/bin/nodejs there for at least one more release.
> I agree.
> Even if you get everything in Debian fixed, you won't know about user
> scripts that have been designed around what Debian does.
Searching for "/usr/bin/nodejs" on github  shows around 27'500 occurences.
> Giving people a release to deal with transitions is a great thing to do
> when there's no good reason not to.
> Maintaining a symlink for a release seems a low cost.
True. On the other hand, the fact that Debian "created" /usr/bin/nodejs also
means it's on Debian's hands to eventually remove it.
For good reasons, Debian forcibly introduced a special-case when Node.js first
appeared in a stable release through only shipping it under /usr/bin/nodejs.
That forced hundreds of projects to cope with that, probably often through
supporting both /usr/bin/node and /usr/bin/nodejs I suspect.
I'm quite convinced that large parts of the Node.js ecosystem will cope well
without any /usr/bin/nodejs available in stretch.
So I'm not convinced it's really worth the trouble to keep it around for
another stable release; I'd probably be fine with a swap of the setup we had
(with the convenience symlink in a different and not-installed-by-default
> For that matter I really can't see a good reason to ever drop the
I want Debian to be able to move on and ahead; cleaning up past special-cases
from our stable releases is good. We only support stable-to-stable upgrades
for good reasons and removing such convenience symlinks falls in the same
category as cleanup of maintainer scripts' code for oldstable-to-stable paths.
I would strongly support removal of the symlink in bullseye.