Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> Jérémy Lal writes ("Bug#862051: nodejs (6.11.2~dfsg-1) experimental; 
> urgency=medium"):
>> Maybe i didn't express myself properly: the idea is to keep /usr/bin/nodejs
>> until it's no longer needed - be it other debian packages or other user
>> scripts.
>
> Earlier you said only "other Debian packages":
>
>    My plan was to simply keep /usr/bin/nodejs around for some time
>    until no debian package rely on it.
>
> Now you say "other user scripts".  I don't know how you would ever
> tell whether "other user scripts" were relying on it.  There is no way
> to for us to tell what people are doing on their computers (and nor
> should there be).

I guess that one could do something like moving the symlink into another
-legasy style package, and recomend that from the main package for one
release to keep upgrades happy. Then drop the recomendation, and wait
for popcon to show that people are not installing the package any more.
Then remove the package in testing early in a cycle and see if anyone
reports bugs about it.

That seems like rather a lot of effort though, when the alternative is
simply tolerating the existence of the two line debian/nodejs.links file.

Is there some down-side for users to having those links in place on
their systems?  If so, I don't think anyone's mentioned it yet.

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands  [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]  HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-|  http://www.hands.com/    http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34,   21075 Hamburg,    GERMANY

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

-- 
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Reply via email to