[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#942809: Bug#942809: Why embed ts-node in node-typescript?
Quoting Pirate Praveen (2019-10-24 15:10:09) > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 16:46, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Sounds reasonable to introduce psl as new _binary_ package (not > > embed in _binary_ package node-though-cookie and add "Provides: > > node-psl" hint): Upstream project has many seemingly unrelated > > reverse dependencies which are probably not all also depending on > > node-though-cookie, so it would be annoying to have those needlessly > > pull in node-though-cookie. > > > > Sounds reasonable to instroduce psl as new _source_ package (not > > embed in src:node-though-cookie): It isn't tiny. > > > > I don't think that is what ftp masters wants. They have communicated > this clearly and lots of NEW packages were rejected as well. > > I quote again "- put together packages that belong together; I am not > sure here, but wouldn't it be fine to have just one package node-d3 or > node-babel that contains all corresponding modules (though their > different versions might create problems in keeping track of them)?" > > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/2018-September/027849.html > > If you are proposing something that is against the recommendation of > ftp masters, you really need to convince them. In case of NEW, their > decision matters, not yours. > > It is fine if you don't agree with their decision. But you will need > to override it before proposing something that is against their > preference. You quote an uncertain suggestion ending in a question, yet talking about it as a recommendation that requires convincing to change. The whole page you reference begins with framing a scope of the problem being projects "only of a few lines of code" and it seems to me that is *exactly* what I care about in my quoted text above. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#942809: Bug#942809: Why embed ts-node in node-typescript?
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 16:46, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Sounds reasonable to introduce psl as new _binary_ package (not embed in _binary_ package node-though-cookie and add "Provides: node-psl" hint): Upstream project has many seemingly unrelated reverse dependencies which are probably not all also depending on node-though-cookie, so it would be annoying to have those needlessly pull in node-though-cookie. Sounds reasonable to instroduce psl as new _source_ package (not embed in src:node-though-cookie): It isn't tiny. I don't think that is what ftp masters wants. They have communicated this clearly and lots of NEW packages were rejected as well. I quote again "- put together packages that belong together; I am not sure here, but wouldn't it be fine to have just one package node-d3 or node-babel that contains all corresponding modules (though their different versions might create problems in keeping track of them)?" https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/2018-September/027849.html If you are proposing something that is against the recommendation of ftp masters, you really need to convince them. In case of NEW, their decision matters, not yours. It is fine if you don't agree with their decision. But you will need to override it before proposing something that is against their preference. -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#942809: Bug#942809: Why embed ts-node in node-typescript?
Quoting Pirate Praveen (2019-10-22 13:12:50) > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 11:26, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >> javascript packages are treated differently from other languages. > >> ruby packages get cleared in days or maximum weeks. > > > > Some JavaScript packages get cleared within hours. > > You shared your experience, I have seen your packages getting cleared > in hours. But unfortunately that is not the same experience for the > rest of us. Great, then it seems we can agree agree that "javascript packages are treated differently from other languages" is wrong description. :-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#942809: Bug#942809: Why embed ts-node in node-typescript?
Le mardi 22 octobre 2019 à 10:01 +0200, Xavier a écrit : > Le Mardi, Octobre 22, 2019 09:10 CEST, Julien Puydt < > julien.pu...@laposte.net> a écrit: > > If you want to have ts-node, why not package it properly, with a > > RFP or > > ITP? > > > > I don't see the point into packaging those together... > > It was an attempt to avoid waiting 6 or 7 months in the NEW queue > with a 50% chance of getting an acceptance or never getting an answer > (which seems to be considered as a rejection, see node-mimelib for > example). Well, I know the NEW queue is kind of a pain, but there's a reason why it's there, so getting around it isn't a good solution. JP -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#942809: Bug#942809: Why embed ts-node in node-typescript?
Le Mardi, Octobre 22, 2019 09:10 CEST, Julien Puydt a écrit: > If you want to have ts-node, why not package it properly, with a RFP or > ITP? > > I don't see the point into packaging those together... > > JP It was an attempt to avoid waiting 6 or 7 months in the NEW queue with a 50% chance of getting an acceptance or never getting an answer (which seems to be considered as a rejection, see node-mimelib for example). In node-sinon packaging, we decide to embed @sinon ecosystem to avoid this. I thought we could consider ts-node as part of the typescript ecosystem. Then OK, I'll ITP and continue to embed ts-node in some packages... -- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
