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 prom
On 12-04-29 at 12:18pm, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> > Oh, I am confused now: Didn't you hint yourself that upstream might
> > not like it?
> >
> > Re-reading I now see that you wrote "...without a patch",
>
> Right, I think it is unlikely that upstream would be happy to
Hi again,
Some clarifications.
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Oh, I am confused now: Didn't you hint yourself that upstream might not
> like it?
>
> Re-reading I now see that you wrote "...without a patch",
Right, I think it is unlikely that upstream would be happy to see
anyone asking them to wor
On 12-04-29 at 11:22am, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> > IMO this change only makes sense because Policy (and an opposite
> > camp equally stubborn as we are, but IMO by a weaker reasoning)
> > forces us to do so.
>
> If that's the case, then I don't support it. I really
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> IMO this change only makes sense because Policy (and an opposite camp
> equally stubborn as we are, but IMO by a weaker reasoning) forces us to
> do so.
If that's the case, then I don't support it. I really don't want to
be part of a bad technical decision made to app
On 12-04-28 at 02:14pm, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> > Excellent.
> >
> > ...but this issue has sprung up again at d-devel@ I suggest we hold
> > our horses with actually releasing the changes until we see what
> > comes of that renewed discussion.
>
> Well, independentl
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Excellent.
>
> ...but this issue has sprung up again at d-devel@ I suggest we hold our
> horses with actually releasing the changes until we see what comes of
> that renewed discussion.
Well, independently of all the making everyone happy stuff, do you
think adding a n
On 12-04-28 at 12:21pm, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> > How about editing directly yourself?
>
> Ok, pushed.
Excellent.
...but this issue has sprung up again at d-devel@ I suggest we hold our
horses with actually releasing the changes until we see what comes of
that ren
tags 650343 + pending
quit
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> How about editing directly yourself?
Ok, pushed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On 12-04-28 at 10:45am, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > I'm attaching a patch that adds some documentation.
>
> And another patch, to make that documentation easier to find.
How about editing directly yourself?
You should already have access: git.debian.org:/git/collab-mai
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> I'm attaching a patch that adds some documentation.
And another patch, to make that documentation easier to find.
From: Jonathan Nieder
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 10:32:56 -0500
Subject: Install README.Debian in the nodejs package.
debian/README.Debian is being installed to
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>You really think that is acceptable for the
> project?
Surely not: the new command has no manpage. :)
I'm attaching a patch that adds some documentation.
debian/README.Debian | 16 +++-
debian/changelog |3 ++-
debian/n
On 28/04/2012 15:06, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-04-27 at 11:58pm, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>
>>> On some machines /usr/sbin/node refers to some program that is not
>>> the node.js interpreter. Therefore it would be helpful to have a
>>> "nodejs" command that does ex
On 12-04-27 at 11:58pm, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > On some machines /usr/sbin/node refers to some program that is not
> > the node.js interpreter. Therefore it would be helpful to have a
> > "nodejs" command that does exactly the same thing as /usr/bin/node,
> > for
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Unfortunately the build system scares me, too, so
> for now all I can offer is a patch against the Debian packaging.
Actually attached this time.
debian/changelog|6 ++
debian/nodejs.links |1 +
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
create m
tags 650343 + patch
quit
Hi Jérémy et al,
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> On some machines /usr/sbin/node refers to some program that is not the
> node.js interpreter. Therefore it would be helpful to have a "nodejs"
> command that does exactly the same thing as /usr/bin/node, for people
> to put into
Package: nodejs
Version: 0.4.12-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: upstream
Hi,
On some machines /usr/sbin/node refers to some program that is not the
node.js interpreter. Therefore it would be helpful to have a "nodejs"
command that does exactly the same thing as /usr/bin/node, for people
to put into t
17 matches
Mail list logo
