Le jeudi, 31 août 2017, 12.25:50 h CEST Ian Jackson a écrit : > Philip Hands writes ("Bug#862051: nodejs (6.11.2~dfsg-1) experimental; urgency=medium"): > > I guess that one could do something like moving the symlink into another > > -legacy 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. > > Even that would be quite unfriendly, because third party scripts might > easily be deployed onto new Debian installs as well as existing ones. > > Also, it is imposing an administrative burden on all Debian users (the > metadata for the -legacy package, spurious search hits, etc.). That > burden might be small but would be completely unjustified.
This exact argument stands against not allowing NodeJS to use /usr/bin/node in the first place, really. We accepted to enforce that change for the /usr/bin/ namespace "first-come-first-served" reason. We imposed a quite heavy administrative burden of either targetting /u/b/nodejs additionally or (finding out and) installing nodejs-legacy for anyone wanting to use NodeJS on Debian. Now, there are two categories of scripts affected by this discussion: * All scripts which support /u/b/nodejs *in addition* to /u/b/node. These do so _because_ of a Debian-specific change, and removing the /u/b/nodejs symlink is not going to break those. * All scripts which support /u/b/nodejs *exclusively*. These do so _because_ of a Debian-specific change, and don't support *any* non-Debian-derivative target (checked Fedora's nodejs RPMs: no /u/b/nodejs). Maintainers of those scripts have at one point decided to support only Debian{, and derivatives}. There are _plenty_ of changes that one needs to care about in a stable upgrade: things like mandatory postfixing of Apache configuration files, removal of specific Python3 versions, removal of upstart, etc. Having to change a shebang isn't a big deal given the amount of things one has to check accross a stable release upgrade. All that to say that despite the very small cost of keeping the symlink around, I do see value in closing the Debian-specific /u/b/nodejs chapter *at some point*. We should not clutter our future releases indefinitely with convenience symlinks for historical reasons, especially not when these were created _by_ Debian and have only been _in_ Debian. Le jeudi, 31 août 2017, 13.52:00 h CEST Jérémy Lal a écrit : > How about printing a "nice" warning explaining it would be a good idea to > move to /usr/bin/node ? Then in next next release drop the nodejs symlink. This seems like a very good plan to me: let /u/b/nodejs spit out a deprecation warning to stderr / syslog but pass all arguments to /u/b/node in Buster; remove it entirely in Bullseye & get proper release note entries for both Buster and Bullseye. Cheers. OdyX
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel