Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)

[Tollef Fog Heen]

]] Ian Jackson 

> Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide 
> /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)"):
> > > Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide 
> > > /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)"):
> > > > 1. The CTTE decision from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.
> > > > 
> > > > This means Debian's normal policies and practices take over and the
> > > > nodejs package is free to provide /usr/bin/node.  The migration should
> > > > be managed according to Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
> > > > arrangements.
> > > 
> > > Can you please say that /usr/bin/nodejs should remain indefinitely.
> > > Otherwise someone may get it into their head to get rid of it.
> > 
> > I think that's covered under the last sentence and don't think we should
> > add any extra restrictions on nodejs.
> 
> I think a natural reading of "Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
> arrangements" applied to /usr/bin/nodejs would arguably involve
> keeping it only for a realease or two.  But in fact, there is no
> reason to ever delete it (except for punishment purposes, as I discuss
> above).

I don't think there's a good reason to add extra restrictions on top of
what we generally do for other packages.  Having a uniform set of rules
that apply to all packages has value.  Special cases are
(technical|social|bureaucratic) debt.

As a non-contrived example, at some point nodejs might want to break
APIs in a way that make switching to /usr/bin/node2 makes sense.  I
don't think keeping /usr/bin/nodejs would make sense then.  I also think
having to have yet another CTTE decision allowing the maintainer to then
drop the symlink would be pure overhead, so I'd rather trust the
maintainer to be responsible and not break stuff unless there's a really
good reason for doing so.

As a separate point, it saddens me that you make it sound like the
maintainer has any incentive or wish to punish users.  Why would they do
that?

> But I guess I will take that message as a promise of your support if
> my fears come to pass.

I don't give out promises unless I use wording to that effect.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are

Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)

[Ian Jackson]

Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node 
(draft resolution)"):
> > Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node 
> > (draft resolution)"):
> > > 1. The CTTE decision from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.
> > > 
> > > This means Debian's normal policies and practices take over and the
> > > nodejs package is free to provide /usr/bin/node.  The migration should
> > > be managed according to Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
> > > arrangements.
> > 
> > Can you please say that /usr/bin/nodejs should remain indefinitely.
> > Otherwise someone may get it into their head to get rid of it.
> 
> I think that's covered under the last sentence and don't think we should
> add any extra restrictions on nodejs.

I think a natural reading of "Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
arrangements" applied to /usr/bin/nodejs would arguably involve
keeping it only for a realease or two.  But in fact, there is no
reason to ever delete it (except for punishment purposes, as I discuss
above).

But I guess I will take that message as a promise of your support if
my fears come to pass.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson    These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)

[Tollef Fog Heen]

]] Ian Jackson 

> Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node 
> (draft resolution)"):
> > 1. The CTTE decision from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.
> > 
> > This means Debian's normal policies and practices take over and the
> > nodejs package is free to provide /usr/bin/node.  The migration should
> > be managed according to Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
> > arrangements.
> 
> Can you please say that /usr/bin/nodejs should remain indefinitely.
> Otherwise someone may get it into their head to get rid of it.

I think that's covered under the last sentence and don't think we should
add any extra restrictions on nodejs.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are

Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)

[David Bremner]

Ian Jackson  writes:

> Can you please say that /usr/bin/nodejs should remain indefinitely.
> Otherwise someone may get it into their head to get rid of it.
>
> (For Debian to remove it would be to punish people who follow the
> previous TC decision and had due regard for the sanity of the global
> command namespace.)

I would vote against such a proposal.

I think that at some point in the future, it may well make sense for
/usr/bin/nodejs to go away. Removing it immediately without helping
reverse-depencies transition would obviously be disruptive and
inconsiderate, but I don't believe anyone has suggested that.



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)

[Ian Jackson]

Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node 
(draft resolution)"):
> 1. The CTTE decision from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.
> 
> This means Debian's normal policies and practices take over and the
> nodejs package is free to provide /usr/bin/node.  The migration should
> be managed according to Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
> arrangements.

Can you please say that /usr/bin/nodejs should remain indefinitely.
Otherwise someone may get it into their head to get rid of it.

(For Debian to remove it would be to punish people who follow the
previous TC decision and had due regard for the sanity of the global
command namespace.)

Ian.

Bug#862051: Allow nodejs to provide /usr/bin/node (draft resolution)

[Didier 'OdyX' Raboud]

Le mercredi, 19 juillet 2017, 21.35:33 h CEST Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> === DRAFT Resolution v2 ===
> 
> The Technical Committee recognises that circumstances change in ways
> that make previous resolutions no longer appropriate.  In 2012, it was
> resolved that the nodejs package should not provide /usr/bin/node due to
> the historical conflict with the ax25-node package.  Node.js is still
> quite popular and the ax25-node package is no longer in stable, testing
> or unstable so the requirement for nodejs to not provide /usr/bin/node
> no longer applies.
> 
> The Committee therefore resolves that:
> 
> 1. The CTTE decision from 2012-07-12 in bug #614907 is repealed.
> 
> This means Debian's normal policies and practices take over and the
> nodejs package is free to provide /usr/bin/node.  The migration should
> be managed according to Debian's usual backwards-compatibility
> arrangements.
> 
> === End DRAFT Resolution v2 ===

Thank you for that draft; we can vote on it as far as I'm concerned.

Cheers,
OdyX