[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#802224: Upstream is now up to 0.5.6

[Leo Iannacone]

Can you plase ask someone else in #debian-js for the ACK?.. I'm a bit busy
these weeks.

Sorry for this!

L.

On 18 May 2016 at 15:02, Gianfranco Costamagna 
wrote:

> Hi L3on,
>
> > What do you think of the current package? Is it worth an upload? [If so,
> > notice I can't do it as I'm no DD (yet)]
>
> since this is blocking node-recast from being installed by the end users,
> I can sponsor
> the package if you give me an ack on the changes.
>
> thanks!
>
> Gianfranco
>



-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25
___
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Small Node.js packages in NEW

[Leo Iannacone]

On 28 June 2015 at 12:38, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:


 2015-06-28 12:02 GMT+02:00 Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com:

 On 27 June 2015 at 16:43, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 
 
  2015-06-27 15:24 GMT+02:00 Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com:
 
  On 26 June 2015 at 22:57, Thorsten Alteholz alteh...@debian.org
  wrote:
  
   Hi Bas,
  
   I'm reluctantly looking into this issue further, but I need to know
   what
   requirements an Node.js module must meet to be eligible for its own
   source package.
  
   What are your requirements for this?
  
  
   from my point of view only the size of the binary package (excluding
   /usr/share/doc and other meta information) is important. So the 120
   bytes of
   node-isarry is far too little. Up to this point I draw the line at
   about
   5kB.
  
 Thorsten
 
 
  Packaging nodejs module has become a nightmare. We should start
  working on bundling the whole node_modules directory per deb package.
 
  That's all.
 
 
 
  May i insist that this must not be a general or systematic practice.
  Doing so should trigger some lintian info tags at minimum.
 
  However it makes sense to not distribute separately a bunch of
  submodules
  that are strongly related to the software that needs them, and in
  addition
  that
  are not used in other debian packages, especially if they contain a few
  lines of
  code !
 
  Currently the approach we have is adding those modules as patches, and
  this is not a good way to do it - not easy to do, to maintain, and is
  error-prone.
 
  It'd be nice to agree on a method for building the source tarball with
  the
  modules
  chosen by the maintainer.
  The list of modules and their versions must be kept somewhere:
  - in debian/watch along with a uupdate-like script to deal with building
  tarball
  - in debian/source/something
  - in debian/copyright ?
 
  and toolchain must allow downloading/rebuilding source tarball using
  mk-origtargz
  so that Files-Excluded stays effective.
 
  Please comment.

 This is still hard to maintain because it's not a solution, but only a
 workaround.

 And it will still work in wrong way, simply because debhelper was not
 developed to bundle and track dependencies inside the package itself.
 You are just forcing the tool to act as you wish.

 I think finally that we should put a bit more intellectual honesty in that
 and start to say ourselves that it's not the right way to maintain nodejs
 package.


 A better solution could be develop a new a wrapper application around
 debhelper, able to use it to configure/update/whatever the dependencies and
 easily-and-quick include them in the package.

 npm2deb already does many stuffs and facilitates a lot the debianize
 process of a nodejs module. We could extend it to also control and to manage
 bundled dependencies easily.


 My 2 cents.



 I don't agree on a debhelper wrapper - including submodules only makes sense
 when
 doing tarball generation (typically before importing into deb package VCS),
 not at build time.

 I was saying that basically all we need to have is a specific
 get-orig-source script
 that is feeded by the watch file and an additional config file (listing
 strict versions of submodules).
 It's a simple solution, it's easy to understand, debug, and maintain.

 npm2deb could do that job (and even populate an initial config file based on
 what's in
 upstream package.json). It should probably also dedupe dependencies, and use
 mk-origtargz in the process because it does some things right (and takes
 Files-Excluded
 into account).


Sounds good (and it's the kind of wrapper I was thinking about).
If you have time, please prepare a pull request.

L.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25


signature.asc
Description: GooPG digital 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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Small Node.js packages in NEW

[Leo Iannacone]

On 27 June 2015 at 16:43, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:


 2015-06-27 15:24 GMT+02:00 Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com:

 On 26 June 2015 at 22:57, Thorsten Alteholz alteh...@debian.org wrote:
 
  Hi Bas,
 
  I'm reluctantly looking into this issue further, but I need to know
  what
  requirements an Node.js module must meet to be eligible for its own
  source package.
 
  What are your requirements for this?
 
 
  from my point of view only the size of the binary package (excluding
  /usr/share/doc and other meta information) is important. So the 120 bytes 
  of
  node-isarry is far too little. Up to this point I draw the line at about
  5kB.
 
Thorsten


 Packaging nodejs module has become a nightmare. We should start
 working on bundling the whole node_modules directory per deb package.

 That's all.



 May i insist that this must not be a general or systematic practice.
 Doing so should trigger some lintian info tags at minimum.

 However it makes sense to not distribute separately a bunch of submodules
 that are strongly related to the software that needs them, and in addition
 that
 are not used in other debian packages, especially if they contain a few
 lines of
 code !

 Currently the approach we have is adding those modules as patches, and
 this is not a good way to do it - not easy to do, to maintain, and is
 error-prone.

 It'd be nice to agree on a method for building the source tarball with the
 modules
 chosen by the maintainer.
 The list of modules and their versions must be kept somewhere:
 - in debian/watch along with a uupdate-like script to deal with building
 tarball
 - in debian/source/something
 - in debian/copyright ?

 and toolchain must allow downloading/rebuilding source tarball using
 mk-origtargz
 so that Files-Excluded stays effective.

 Please comment.

This is still hard to maintain because it's not a solution, but only a 
workaround.

And it will still work in wrong way, simply because debhelper was not developed 
to bundle and track dependencies inside the package itself.
You are just forcing the tool to act as you wish.

I think finally that we should put a bit more intellectual honesty in that and 
start to say ourselves that it's not the right way to maintain nodejs package.


A better solution could be develop a new a wrapper application around 
debhelper, able to use it to configure/update/whatever the dependencies and 
easily-and-quick include them in the package.

npm2deb already does many stuffs and facilitates a lot the debianize process 
of a nodejs module. We could extend it to also control and to manage bundled 
dependencies easily.


My 2 cents.

L.


signature.asc
Description: GooPG digital 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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Small Node.js packages in NEW

[Leo Iannacone]

On 26 June 2015 at 22:57, Thorsten Alteholz alteh...@debian.org wrote:

 Hi Bas,

 I'm reluctantly looking into this issue further, but I need to know what
 requirements an Node.js module must meet to be eligible for its own
 source package.

 What are your requirements for this?


 from my point of view only the size of the binary package (excluding 
 /usr/share/doc and other meta information) is important. So the 120 bytes of 
 node-isarry is far too little. Up to this point I draw the line at about 5kB.

   Thorsten


Packaging nodejs module has become a nightmare. We should start
working on bundling the whole node_modules directory per deb package.

That's all.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25


signature.asc
Description: GooPG digital 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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#787924: Bug#787924: node-crc: test failure Error: Use CoffeeScript.register()

[Leo Iannacone]

On 6 June 2015 at 14:02, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:

 Package: node-crc
 Version: 3.0.0-2
 Severity: important

 Hello,

 while rebuilding node-crc in a clean sid sbuild chroot, this error happens:

 dh build
dh_testdir
dh_auto_configure
debian/rules override_dh_auto_build
 make[1]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»'
 if [ ! -d lib.org ]; then mv lib lib.orig; fi
 coffee --bare --output ./lib --compile ./src/*.coffee
 make[1]: Leaving directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»'
debian/rules override_dh_auto_test
 make[1]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»'
 mocha -C test/*.spec.coffee

 /usr/lib/coffee-script/lib/coffee-script/coffee-script.js:213
   throw new Error(Use CoffeeScript.register() or require the coffee-s
 ^
 Error: Use CoffeeScript.register() or require the coffee-script/register 
 module to require .coffee.md files.
   at Object.base.(anonymous function) [as .coffee] 
 (/usr/lib/coffee-script/lib/coffee-script/coffee-script.js:213:17)
   at Module.load (module.js:356:32)
   at Function.Module._load (module.js:312:12)
   at Module.require (module.js:364:17)
   at require (module.js:380:17)
   at /usr/lib/nodejs/mocha/lib/mocha.js:172:27
   at Array.forEach (native)
   at Mocha.loadFiles (/usr/lib/nodejs/mocha/lib/mocha.js:169:14)
   at Mocha.run (/usr/lib/nodejs/mocha/lib/mocha.js:356:31)
   at Object.anonymous (/usr/lib/nodejs/mocha/bin/_mocha:366:16)
   at Module._compile (module.js:456:26)
   at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:474:10)
   at Module.load (module.js:356:32)
   at Function.Module._load (module.js:312:12)
   at Function.Module.runMain (module.js:497:10)
   at startup (node.js:119:16)
   at node.js:906:3

 make[1]: *** [override_dh_auto_test] Error 8
 debian/rules:19: recipe for target 'override_dh_auto_test' failed

 Is mocha the problem ? node-crc ? coffeescript ?


I think it's a mocha with new coffee that fails.

I tried to update mocha, but I got test errors. If someone around could help 
(checkout git master) I would be more than happy.


Leo.


signature.asc
Description: GooPG digital 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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating Mocha

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

FYI:

I'm going to update mocha at version 2.2.5

Cheers,
L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25
___
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating Mocha

[Leo Iannacone]

I just figured out that to update node-mocha we need node-diff upgrade.

Jonas, any plan to do that?

L.

On 30 May 2015 at 17:55, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:

 Hi all,

 FYI:

 I'm going to update mocha at version 2.2.5

 Cheers,
 L.

 --
 Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
 Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
 GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25




--
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25


signature.asc
Description: GooPG digital 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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] node-tar_1.0.3-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

[Leo Iannacone]

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Did you just hijack node-tar that was already in the archive ?

 Please contact pkg-javascript and try to coordinate your uploads with
 this team. Check its wiki, read what npm2deb says about the modules
 you're packaging.

 For instance, the team was avoiding node-readable-stream for some
 reason.
 It would have been nicer to discuss and get some advices before blindly
 uploading.


Moreover,

please, consider to add your contributions to the DB of npm2deb (if needed):

https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Database


L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] node-serve-static in danger of getting removed

[Leo Iannacone]

Please,

Feel free to upload the package. I do not have enough time to test it in
these busy days...

Thank you all...

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Help on RC bug

[Leo Iannacone]

Hello there,

how are you?

Can someone of you help on this bug, please?

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=775843

I am full busy in these days with University and I fear to do not have
enough time to inspect what to do (if import the single patch or
update the whole express suite).


Ciao!
L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Help on RC bug

[Leo Iannacone]

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
 Can someone of you help on this bug, please?

 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=775843

Upstream reference:

 https://github.com/expressjs/serve-static/issues/26

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] patching away readable-stream might not be right

[Leo Iannacone]

On 15 October 2014 09:35, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le mardi 14 octobre 2014 à 19:44 -0700, Andrew Kelley a écrit :
 See
 https://github.com/andrewrk/node-multiparty/commit/11780f4a6e3e8c6d439639794c795bb5fdaefe97#commitcomment-8163898

 According to this, if a package depends on readable-stream 1.1.x, then it
 is actually puling in node 0.11 stream API. This means that patching it to
 use built-in v0.10.29 stream API could introduce bugs.

 So maybe we should package node-readable-stream 1.1.x?

 It seems right to do that - more modules are hopefully going to depend
 on streams3 behavior...

Using codesearch we can find those debian packages should depend on 1.1.x

http://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=%22readable-stream%22%3A.*1.1


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Comments regarding node-express-session_1.7.0-1_amd64.changes

[Leo Iannacone]

On 4 October 2014 14:04, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le samedi 04 octobre 2014 à 10:49 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 On 3 October 2014 23:14, Thorsten Alteholz
 ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org wrote:
  Hi Leo,

 Hi Thorsten,

  will there be a package node-uid-safe?

 Yes, it will be .. but not sure when in which way since that module
 (like any other) is too small.

 After discussing this in JS team we ended up they should be included in
 common packages, see this wiki page:
  https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/CommonPackages

 unfortunately I didn't enough time during last weeks to work on it,
 neither to study how packages multi-sources work.

 It could be wonderful if someone else can take this task.

 I turned that idea over and over and came up with the conclusion
 that we should avoid that idea of making bundles of unrelated software.

 Please, either include node-uid-safe in node-express-session (as patch,
 or using the kind of tarball packager i've been trying to make), or make
 a proper debian package of node-uid-safe.

A proper debian package was already done, but it got REJECTED from ftp-masters.

I will think better on this. uid-safe has some reverse dependencies
which sould be packaged (csrf' modules).

I don't know right where put uid-safe, if in express-session or in csrf...

 Any other solution is a mess waiting to happen - the best way to
 distribute software in debian is by making proper debian packages, not
 bundling modules because it saves resources.

+1 . Agree.

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#763988: node-growl: New upstream version

[Leo Iannacone]

Package: node-growl
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,


please consider to update growl, currently upstream has released 1.8.1

 https://github.com/visionmedia/node-growl

I need this to update mocha.

Thanks.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Providing node-ms with node-debug

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi,

I'm going to update node-debug to version 2.0.0, which depends on module 'ms'.

I would like to add that module as patch and then install it in
/usr/lib/nodejs/ms.. I other words, I would like to provide 'ms'
with 'debug'.

Objections or better ideas?

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] NPM: Cannot find module installed globally

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi,

with npm 1.4.21+ds-2 I'm not able to require module installed globally...

See this:

$ sudo npm install -g coffee-script
/usr/local/bin/coffee - /usr/local/lib/node_modules/coffee-script/bin/coffee
/usr/local/bin/cake - /usr/local/lib/node_modules/coffee-script/bin/cake
coffee-script@1.8.0 /usr/local/lib/node_modules/coffee-script
└── mkdirp@0.3.5

$ nodejs -e require('coffee-script');

module.js:340
throw err;
  ^
Error: Cannot find module 'coffee-script'
at Function.Module._resolveFilename (module.js:338:15)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:280:25)
at Module.require (module.js:364:17)
at require (module.js:380:17)
at [eval]:1:1
at Object.anonymous ([eval]-wrapper:6:22)
at Module._compile (module.js:456:26)
at evalScript (node.js:532:25)
at startup (node.js:80:7)
at node.js:902:3


Is this happening only to me?

Leo.

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] node-highlight: incompatible with nodejs module name: highlight.js

[Leo Iannacone]

On 19 September 2014 00:07, Cédric Boutillier bou...@debian.org wrote:
 Thanks for your report. I packaged highlight.js as a dependency of
 another tool, and I am not completely familiar with the JavaScript
 world. Excuse my naive questions below.

No problem.

 I understand that because the package name in the package.json file is
 hightlight.js, the nodejs package should be named node-hightlight.js.
 Should I install the package.json file in this node-hightlight.js?

Exaclty .. more important: please, put files in the right location.

In your case: /usr/lib/nodejs/hightlight.js

For more info, see https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/

 Should I rename also the libjs-hightlight to libjs-highlight.js for
 coherence?

Yes, you should, according the library name.
For more info, see https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Policy

Best,
L.

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] how to build jsondiffpatch?

[Leo Iannacone]

On 15 September 2014 20:19, Andrew Kelley superjo...@gmail.com wrote:
 I am working on packaging jsondiffpatch:
 https://github.com/benjamine/jsondiffpatch

 This would be:

 Source package: jsondiffpatch.js
 Node package: node-jsondiffpatch
 libjs package: libjs-jsondiffpatch

 Node package part is done. The hard part is the libjs package. The
 repository ships with build/* containing generated files. So I have excluded
 those in a dfsg tarball.

 However now we must build those files ourselves. The way it is done is with
 gulp:

 build: node_modules
 @./node_modules/.bin/gulp build

 gulp is not in debian and it would take a lot of work to get it there:

You could try to understand what's going on in Gulpfile.js and
override_dh_auto_build with a similar workflow.

 Additionally, all the gulp stuff is apparently calling browserify, so that
 build-dependency is dragged in too! x.x

 What can we do?

Ok (IMHO) for now build only node-jsondiffpatch.
browserify needs more attention.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#761681: Bug#761681: should.js build-depends on node-mocha which isn't in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 15 September 2014 19:42, Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org wrote:
 Hi,

 As per the title of this bug, node-mocha should be packaged, or should.js
 should not build-depend on it.

Hi Thomas,

node-mocha is provided by mocha package:

Package: mocha
Source: node-mocha
...
Provides: node-mocha

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#761681: Bug#761681: should.js build-depends on node-mocha which isn't in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 15 September 2014 19:42, Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org wrote:
 Hi,

 As per the title of this bug, node-mocha should be packaged, or should.js
 should not build-depend on it.


Hi Thomas,

node-mocha is provided by mocha, see:

$ apt-cache show mocha | grep ^Provides

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Questions about packaging node-htmlparser2 and dependencies

[Leo Iannacone]

On 14 September 2014 14:50, W. Martin Borgert deba...@debian.org wrote:
 Hi,

 to solve
 #644767: ITP: tilemill -- map design studio
 and
 #761328: RFP: python-mpld3 -- a D3 viewer for matplotlib
 node-htmlparser2 needs to be packaged:
 #761433: RFP: node-htmlparser2 -- fast  forgiving HTML/XML/RSS parser

 node-htmlparser2 in turn depends on:
 #761437: RFP: node-domelementtype -- all the types of nodes in htmlparser2's 
 dom
 #761438: RFP: node-domhandler -- handler for htmlparser2 that turns pages 
 into a dom
 #761439: RFP: node-domutils -- utilities for working with htmlparser2's dom
 #743153: ITP: node-entities -- Encode and decode XML/HTML entities with ease 
 - module for Node.js
 #761442: RFP: node-readable-stream -- a user-land copy of the stream library 
 from Node.js v0.11.x

 Question 1:

 If I understand correctly, node-dom{elementtype,handler,utils}
 don't make sense outside of the scope of node-htmlparser2. All
 three are very small (0.5, 5, 12 KiB respectively) and may not
 worth separate packages. OTOH, I have no idea how a proper git
 packaging flow works with multiple upstream repositories. What
 is recommended in such a situation?

You can bundle them as patch.. see node-promises as example on how
bundle module (node-promises bundles node-asap).

If you do that (bundle modules), please take care to update this wiki page:
 https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Database


 Question 2:

 node-readable-stream seems to be a code copy of node code, but
 with some differences that are not clear to me. I would prefer
 to not package it, but node-htmlparser2 seems to depend on it.
 Nobody here likes code duplication. Package or not?

No, you don't .. see node-multiparty for a patch.

L.

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] packages rejected

[Leo Iannacone]

On 12 September 2014 10:28, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 This bundling story is tricky and poses more problems than it solves.
 What does it solve, again ?

The biggest objection (as far as I remember) came out from d-devel ML and was:
 Hey, these too small libraries have more package-metadata than lines of code

That was true, see [0][1].



In this case, why don't nodemodules-connect-goodies ?

Anyway.. If we go ahead with those big packages, we may need to
develop something (auto-scripts/plugins/wrappers/whatever for
debhelper) in order to correctly track upstream, get the libraries
updated and facilitate the maintaining for those big packages.

A web service (e.g.) or . I don't know ... ideas?

L.


[0] - 
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/node-escape-html.git/tree/index.js
[1] - 
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-parseurl.git/tree/index.js

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] please push all node-postgres gbp branches

[Leo Iannacone]

On 6 September 2014 14:30, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Jérémy Lal (2014-09-06 14:16:21)
 Le samedi 06 septembre 2014 à 12:59 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
 Quoting Jérémy Lal (2014-09-06 08:07:46)
 i just noticed that there was something missing to the gbp repo.

 Right - thanks for spotting that.  I've pushed in now, and will
 finalize that (old!) release now.


 Besides that, will you have time to update it ? It's at 3.4.2 now.

 Newest node-postgres seems to need these modules missing in Debian:

 buffer-writer: 1.0.0,
 pgpass: 0.0.3,
 packet-reader: 0.2.0,
 pg-connection-string: 0.1.1,
 pg-types: 1.4.0

 Help is much appreciated getting those packaged!

 I'm pretty sure i could team up with Leo (if he's available) to get
 the packages done in the day... but there's an ongoing discussion
 about bundling modules, so i wonder if it is a good occasion to start
 one.

 What do you think ?

 I am no fan of bundling!

 I appreciate the concern for keeping resources tight, but have seen no
 actual measurements as to the damage caused by tracking upstream
 projects individually - and I see a real damage to bundling in that it
 weakens tracking our upstreams (are bundled jQuery plugins up-to-date?
 How to check that - as a developer and as a user?).

 Perl team has recently gone _away_ from bundling modules.

 ...but I still remember when I adviced you to not taking serious the
 complaints about the node name - we lost ~3 years on that account :-(

 So I guess my advice is to _not_ listen directly to what I think, but
 only take it as inspiration - try distinguish between noise and
 substantial parts from those frowning upon tiny packages.  I agree that
 a package containing essentially a single line of code is insane.

 What do anyone in the team think?


Are we messing up with those small modules?

It's not so clear, so far, what to do with this kind of utils.

Can we discuss all the pro and cons ?
I have never managed bundled-multi-sources packages...

And... should we have a max-lines-of-code number under of that the
module should go in a multi-module package ?

L.

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Regrouping some modules ? [Was Re: Comments regarding node-uid-safe_1.0.1-1_amd64.changes]

[Leo Iannacone]

On 26 August 2014 11:15, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
  All of these packages (IMHO) should be named as
 node-${CATEGORY}utils, i.e.:
   * node-httputils

 To avoid the case where one upstream module gets called 'httputils',
 i suggest a different name scheme:
 nodemodules-

+1



  The problem with those bundles is that we'll never know if/when
  a module inside them isn't required any more.

 Mmm .. can't codesearch.debian.net help on this ?

 Of course, but it isn't as straightforward as checking dependencies.

 I propose that nodemodules-time *must* list which modules it Provides,
 so others packages depend on node-ms (in that example) and do *not*
 depend on nodemodules-time.

Elegant! +1


Let's start with some module?

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Regrouping some modules ? [Was Re: Comments regarding node-uid-safe_1.0.1-1_amd64.changes]

[Leo Iannacone]

On 23 August 2014 21:23, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le samedi 23 août 2014 à 16:52 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 On 23 August 2014 12:08, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
  I prefer the first idea from Thorsten:
  time, email, fs packages bundling utilities by category.
 
  Let's try to make a list of categories ?

 What about:
  * http
  * css
  * html
  * time
  * mime
  * mail (?)
  * log (?)
  * fs (?)

 All of these packages (IMHO) should be named as node-${CATEGORY}utils, 
 i.e.:
  * node-httputils

 * streams
 * async
 * module loading (amd, requirejs, ...)

Here a wiki page to list packages and modules included:
 https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/CommonPackages

Please, populate it!


 The problem with those bundles is that we'll never know if/when
 a module inside them isn't required any more.

Mmm .. can't codesearch.debian.net help on this ?

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Regrouping some modules ? [Was Re: Comments regarding node-uid-safe_1.0.1-1_amd64.changes]

[Leo Iannacone]

On 22 August 2014 16:31, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 While maintaining a buch of unrelated packages seems difficult,
 would it make sense to regroup all competing packages that bring similar
 functions ?

 Sometimes one module is clearly better than others and we try to patch
 less popular modules away, but sometimes it isn't so clear so we end up
 with several packages doing the same thing, only in different subtle
 ways.

 A nodejs toolkit providing common low-level utilities could be also a
 matter of discussion.


Why not try to identify some categories (as suggested for node-ms:
time, or email or filesystem ...) to regroup those small modules
?

L.

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Regrouping some modules ? [Was Re: Comments regarding node-uid-safe_1.0.1-1_amd64.changes]

[Leo Iannacone]

On 23 August 2014 10:55, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
 On 23 August 2014 10:12, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
 Why not try to identify some categories (as suggested for node-ms:
 time, or email or filesystem ...) to regroup those small modules
 ?

 Another approach could be to group all modules which are coming from
 the same team.

 For instance, we could have a node-express-common package which
 includes these repos:
  https://github.com/expressjs/

 Or a node-socket.io-common package which includes the
 [socket|engine].io-* modules listed in:
  https://github.com/Automattic

Also:
 * https://github.com/jshttp/ (Low-Level JavaScript HTTP-related Modules)

are there other relevant team ?


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] What's the best section for JS packages?

[Leo Iannacone]

On 2 July 2014 11:20, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-07-02 10:05:36)
 On 27 June 2014 15:50, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
  Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-06-27 10:25:17)
  all of my packages (most of them are node modules) have
   Section: web
  in debian/control.
 
  Do you think is not a happy choice? is `misc' better?
 
  and what about JavaScript packages?
 
  If the main use is related to web, then that's indeed a good choice.
 
  It might make sense to request new section for javascript and/or Nodejs
  libraries (but not for applications implemented in those scripting
  languages) at some point - try compare number of packages with those of
  other sections to get a feeling when that might be relevant to propose
  (I guess that should then be raised on debian-devel list.


 I think this is the best time to ask for a new section.

 We have already many node modules packaged (211) and the number is
 increasing day by day.
 It makes no sense to me waiting more time...

 Fine with me, I just won't lead it myself (simply because I have plenty
 on my hands elsewhere).


For the logs, the section request is filed as #753480

 * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=753480


Ciao!
Leo.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Ugifyjs 2.x - fix for twitter-bootstrap

[Leo Iannacone]

Hello,

since twitter-bootstrap has been orphaned, can someone of you update
the package with the attached debdiff in order to close #750717 ?

It's really simple, it only removes the `-nc' option from the Makefile.


Ciao!


Leo.


twitter-bootstrap.debdiff
Description: Binary data
___
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] About mime-types module

[Leo Iannacone]

On 4 July 2014 01:25, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le jeudi 03 juillet 2014 à 22:11 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 On 2 July 2014 14:51, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
  On 2 July 2014 11:18, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
  Le mercredi 02 juillet 2014 à 10:13 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
  Hi,
 
  I would like to package mime-types for Debian.
 
https://github.com/expressjs/mime-types
 
  Now.. during build, upstream makes HTTP requests to get mime
  information externally and stores that in local files (already present
  in git repository) - see build.js file in the repository.
 
  As far as I remember, making internet connections during package-build
  is not allowed (am I wrong?.. is it only for Ubuntu?). On the other
  hand, as far as I understood, I should not include those files already
  downloaded and parsed by build.js and stored in lib/* directory...
 
  So, what can I do in this case?
  Allow internet connections during build or use pre-downloaded files ?
 
  Absolutely not !
  Source is downloaded, code-reviewed, copyright-reviewed, etc...
  and only then it is build.
 
  I suggest you just use what's already in debian :
  /etc/mime.types in 'mime-support' package,
  /usr/share/node-mime/node.types in 'node-mime' package.
 
  That's a great idea!
  I will patch build system to use them..


 I just realized that this file (used by upstream):
  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/conf/mime.types

 is shipped with apache2-doc package:
  apache2-doc: /usr/share/doc/apache2-doc/examples/apache2/mime.types.gz


 Should I use it instead of /etc/mime.types ?

 /etc/mime.types is designed specifically to make sure all packages get
 the same level of mime support. Read the head of the file. The file
 you're referring to is stored in examples dir. It might disappear, it
 might not be updated.


I was thinking following upstream choices was the best way to get
original library behavior unchanged...

Anyway, package is ready:
 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/node-mime-types.git

Cheers!

Leo


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#750715: ipython: FTBFS against uglify 2.x series - uglifyjs -nc is not a supported option

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi Julian,

please consider to test this patch.

Thanks!
Index: debian/patches/packaged-js.patch
===
--- debian/patches/packaged-js.patch(revision 29613)
+++ debian/patches/packaged-js.patch(working copy)
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
  mkdir -p bootstrap/js
  cat js/bootstrap-transition.js js/bootstrap-alert.js js/bootstrap-button.js js/bootstrap-carousel.js js/bootstrap-collapse.js js/bootstrap-dropdown.js js/bootstrap-modal.js js/bootstrap-tooltip.js js/bootstrap-popover.js js/bootstrap-scrollspy.js js/bootstrap-tab.js js/bootstrap-typeahead.js js/bootstrap-affix.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.js
 -./node_modules/.bin/uglifyjs -nc bootstrap/js/bootstrap.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js
-+uglifyjs -nc bootstrap/js/bootstrap.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js
++uglifyjs bootstrap/js/bootstrap.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js
  echo /*!\n* Bootstrap.js by @fat  @mdo\n* Copyright 2012 Twitter, Inc.\n* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt\n*/;  bootstrap/js/copyright.js
  cat bootstrap/js/copyright.js bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.js
  rm bootstrap/js/copyright.js bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Node modules and autopkgtest

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi!

FYI:

Autopkgtest support was added to npm2deb, now it automatically creates
files and directories needed to run test suite properly.

I edited to Node.js Policy wikipage [0], suggesting that package
'should' support autopkgtest.

In that page I also provided and example and a bash script to
automatically create required files for existing packages[1].


Regards,

Leo.



[0] - https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Manual
[1] - https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Manual#autopkgtest

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] can we upload node-uuid instead of node-node-uuid?

[Leo Iannacone]

On 5 July 2014 00:16, Andrew Kelley superjo...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:

  Le vendredi 04 juillet 2014 à 12:14 -0700, Andrew Kelley a écrit :
   I'd rather patch upstream sources that incorrectly do
   require('node-uuid')
   instead of patching upstream sources (mine included) that correctly
   do
   require('uuid').
 

 May I ask you which module are you going to debianize??

 https://github.com/andrewrk/groovebasin/

And, what about using this module: https://github.com/crypto-utils/uid-safe  ??

I will debianize it asap, but without the support to moderize 'mz' ...



-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] can we upload node-uuid instead of node-node-uuid?

[Leo Iannacone]

On 5 July 2014 02:23, Andrew Kelley superjo...@gmail.com wrote:
 As an upstream author I'm happy to switch to using uid-safe. I don't know
 what you're referring to with 'mz'.

See this issue:
 https://github.com/crypto-utils/uid-safe/issues/1

I will patch (for Debian) that module and remove promises stuff...
(and it won't depend on 'mz').

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] About mime-types module

[Leo Iannacone]

On 2 July 2014 14:51, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
 On 2 July 2014 11:18, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le mercredi 02 juillet 2014 à 10:13 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 Hi,

 I would like to package mime-types for Debian.

   https://github.com/expressjs/mime-types

 Now.. during build, upstream makes HTTP requests to get mime
 information externally and stores that in local files (already present
 in git repository) - see build.js file in the repository.

 As far as I remember, making internet connections during package-build
 is not allowed (am I wrong?.. is it only for Ubuntu?). On the other
 hand, as far as I understood, I should not include those files already
 downloaded and parsed by build.js and stored in lib/* directory...

 So, what can I do in this case?
 Allow internet connections during build or use pre-downloaded files ?

 Absolutely not !
 Source is downloaded, code-reviewed, copyright-reviewed, etc...
 and only then it is build.

 I suggest you just use what's already in debian :
 /etc/mime.types in 'mime-support' package,
 /usr/share/node-mime/node.types in 'node-mime' package.

 That's a great idea!
 I will patch build system to use them..


I just realized that this file (used by upstream):
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/docs/conf/mime.types

is shipped with apache2-doc package:
 apache2-doc: /usr/share/doc/apache2-doc/examples/apache2/mime.types.gz


Should I use it instead of /etc/mime.types ?


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] What's the best section for JS packages?

[Leo Iannacone]

On 27 June 2014 15:50, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-06-27 10:25:17)
 all of my packages (most of them are node modules) have
  Section: web
 in debian/control.

 Do you think is not a happy choice? is `misc' better?

 and what about JavaScript packages?

 If the main use is related to web, then that's indeed a good choice.

 It might make sense to request new section for javascript and/or Nodejs
 libraries (but not for applications implemented in those scripting
 languages) at some point - try compare number of packages with those of
 other sections to get a feeling when that might be relevant to propose
 (I guess that should then be raised on debian-devel list.


I think this is the best time to ask for a new section.

We have already many node modules packaged (211) and the number is
increasing day by day.
It makes no sense to me waiting more time...

No?

Let's do that?

L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] About mime-types module

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi,

I would like to package mime-types for Debian.

  https://github.com/expressjs/mime-types

Now.. during build, upstream makes HTTP requests to get mime
information externally and stores that in local files (already present
in git repository) - see build.js file in the repository.

As far as I remember, making internet connections during package-build
is not allowed (am I wrong?.. is it only for Ubuntu?). On the other
hand, as far as I understood, I should not include those files already
downloaded and parsed by build.js and stored in lib/* directory...

So, what can I do in this case?
Allow internet connections during build or use pre-downloaded files ?


L.



-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#753480: ftp.debian.org: Please add a section for JavaScript packages

[Leo Iannacone]

Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: wishlist

Hi,

currenlty there are around 350 packages provinding JavaScript libraries
and the number is quickly increasing whit the arrival of Node.js
server-side modules.

Most of these packages are now in section web, but not all of them are
really related to web, or in the more generic misc section.

After discussioning this in JavaScript team, we ended up that it would be 
better 
to request a new section javascript where put these packages.

The regex to add existing packages is [node|libjs]-.*

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] About mime-types module

[Leo Iannacone]

On 2 July 2014 11:18, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le mercredi 02 juillet 2014 à 10:13 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 Hi,

 I would like to package mime-types for Debian.

   https://github.com/expressjs/mime-types

 Now.. during build, upstream makes HTTP requests to get mime
 information externally and stores that in local files (already present
 in git repository) - see build.js file in the repository.

 As far as I remember, making internet connections during package-build
 is not allowed (am I wrong?.. is it only for Ubuntu?). On the other
 hand, as far as I understood, I should not include those files already
 downloaded and parsed by build.js and stored in lib/* directory...

 So, what can I do in this case?
 Allow internet connections during build or use pre-downloaded files ?

 Absolutely not !
 Source is downloaded, code-reviewed, copyright-reviewed, etc...
 and only then it is build.

 I suggest you just use what's already in debian :
 /etc/mime.types in 'mime-support' package,
 /usr/share/node-mime/node.types in 'node-mime' package.

That's a great idea!
I will patch build system to use them..

 that last one seems to be for mime types that are not official or maybe
 not yet in debian. Could you check if it is possible to include them in
 mime-support - or most of them ?

Yes.. I will file a bug against mime-support :)


Cheers,

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] What's the best section for JS packages?

[Leo Iannacone]

Hello,

all of my packages (most of them are node modules) have
 Section: web
in debian/control.

Do you think is not a happy choice? is `misc' better?

and what about JavaScript packages?

L.



-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#750715: ipython: FTBFS against uglify 2.x series - uglifyjs -nc is not a supported option

[Leo Iannacone]

On 9 June 2014 16:29, Julian Taylor jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com wrote:
 tags 750715 + help
 thanks

 As far as I understand uglify 1 and 2 are two different projects.
 Why must the version 2 package replace the version 1 pakage?
 that is not a viable strategy for hard to test javascript code.
 It seems to me it would be simpler to just have two packages.

From the homepage of UglifyJS (https://github.com/mishoo/UglifyJS):

I started working on UglifyJS's successor, version 2. It's almost a
full rewrite (except for the parser which is heavily modified,
everything else starts from scratch). I've detailed my reasons in the
README, see the project page.

https://github.com/mishoo/UglifyJS2

Version 1 will continue to be maintained for fixing show-stopper bugs,
but no new features should be expected.


They share the same namespace so installing both at same time would
raise a package conflict.

In my point of view, and according with manapage, it should be better
go head with v2 and have as more as possible packages compatible with
this version.

As you can see, we have very few packages, at the moment, not
compatible with uglifyjs2:

 https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Tasks/UglifyJS2.x


 Anyhow I don't know much about javascript so I probably need a patch.

Really easy, just remove '-nc' option while calling uglifyjs in
debian/patches/packaged-js.patch:

-+ uglifyjs -nc bootstrap/js/bootstrap.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js
++ uglifyjs bootstrap/js/bootstrap.js  bootstrap/js/bootstrap.min.tmp.js

It is also compatible with uglifyjs v1, so you don't have to wait for
uglifyjs2 in unstable to apply this change.



That's all.

Cheers,

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#750714: leaflet: FTBFS against uglify 2.x series - Cannot call method 'parse' of undefined

[Leo Iannacone]

Source: leaflet
Severity: important


Dear maintainer,

your package fails to build from source with uglify version 2.4.13-1,
which is now in experimental and will be soon migrated to unstable.

Here a snip of buildlog:

mkdir -p .

Scanning upstream source for new/changed copyright notices...

licensecheck -c '.*' -r --copyright -i 
'^(dist/images/(layers|marker-icon-2x)\.png|debian/(changelog|copyright(|_hints|_newhints)))'
 -l '9' * | /usr/lib/cdbs/licensecheck2dep5  debian/copyright_newhints
7 combinations of copyright and licensing found.
No new copyright notices found - assuming no news is good news...
touch debian/stamp-copyright-check
mkdir -p debian/upstream-cruft
touch debian/stamp-upstream-cruft
jake build

Concatenating and compressing 75 files...
Uncompressed: 217.22 KB (new)
Saved to dist/leaflet-src.js
jake aborted.
TypeError: Cannot call method 'parse' of undefined
at uglify (/tmp/buildd/leaflet-0.7.2/build/build.js:51:28)
at Object.exports.build (/tmp/buildd/leaflet-0.7.2/build/build.js:121:29)
(See full trace by running task with --trace)
debian/rules:43: recipe for target 'build/libjs-leaflet' failed
make: *** [build/libjs-leaflet] Error 1
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2


Thanks in advance,

Leo.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#750716: coffeescript: FTBFS against uglify 2.x series - Cannot call method 'parse' of undefined

[Leo Iannacone]

Source: coffeescript
Severity: important


Dear maintainer,

your package fails to build from source with uglify version 2.4.13-1,
which is now in experimental and will be soon migrated to unstable.

Here a snip of buildlog:

chmod +x bin/cake
bin/cake build
bin/cake build
bin/cake build:browser

/tmp/buildd/coffeescript-1.4.0/Cakefile:139
 code = uglify.gen_code(uglify.ast_squeeze(uglify.ast_mangle(parser.parse(code
^
TypeError: Cannot call method 'parse' of undefined
at Object.Rewriter [as action] 
(/tmp/buildd/coffeescript-1.4.0/Cakefile:139:74)
at helpers.extend.invoke 
(/tmp/buildd/coffeescript-1.4.0/lib/coffee-script/cake.js:44:26)
at Object.exports.run 
(/tmp/buildd/coffeescript-1.4.0/lib/coffee-script/cake.js:69:21)
at Object.anonymous (/tmp/buildd/coffeescript-1.4.0/bin/cake:7:38)
at Module._compile (module.js:456:26)
at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:474:10)
at Module.load (module.js:356:32)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:312:12)
at Function.Module.runMain (module.js:497:10)
at startup (node.js:119:16)
debian/rules:55: recipe for target 'debian/stamp-build' failed
make: *** [debian/stamp-build] Error 8
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2
E: Failed autobuilding of package


However, according with latest release of coffescript, it should be compatible
with uglifyjs 2.x:

https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/blob/master/package.json



Thanks in advance,

Leo.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#750720: python-livereload is not compatible with uglifyjs 2.x series

[Leo Iannacone]

Source: python-livereload
Severity: important

Dear Maintainer,

uglifyjs 2.x series is now in experimental and will be soon migrated
to unstable.

Your package depends on uglifyjs, but from seeems be not compatible.

It uses '-nc' option which is deprecated in 2.x. A simple patch like
this could be enough, however more tests are needed:

---
 livereload/compiler.py |2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/livereload/compiler.py
+++ b/livereload/compiler.py
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@
 
 def uglifyjs(path, output, mode='w'):
 _compile = CommandCompiler(path)
-_compile.init_command('uglifyjs --nc')
+_compile.init_command('uglifyjs')
 return functools.partial(_compile, output, mode)
 

Leo.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.13.0-27-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] new release of coffeescript

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi,

is there some reason why coffeescript is not updated to the last release?


Jonas, can I help in case?

L.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating wrong debian watch files

[Leo Iannacone]

On 14 May 2014 14:22, David Prévot da...@tilapin.org wrote:
 Hi Leo,

 Thanks for your QA work!

 Le 14/05/2014 03:18, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 = Already fixed or false positives =

 These ones:

  * OR have already a suggested debian/watch in sepwatch
  * OR the debian/watch is already fixed in the repository
  * OR at time I checked them, they had a temporary issue with their
 own watch file.
 [...]
  * pdf.js

 Do you have any idea about this issue? I mean, the watch file is
 effective, and the accurate next upstream version is correctly
 documented in the PTS and DDPO, but is in error according to UDD.

 Thanks in advance for any pointer or follow up with UDD maintainers.


FYI: I filed a bug against qa.debian.org about this issue:

http://bugs.debian.org/748223


Ciao!

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating wrong debian watch files

[Leo Iannacone]

On 14 May 2014 11:48, Emilien Klein emilien+deb...@klein.st wrote:
 2014-05-14 9:28 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-05-14 09:18:09)
 in DMD[0] we have 53 packages with a broken watch file.

 I wrote a script[1] able to fix most of them.

 Nice work!

 Please beware that not all JavaScript packages are maintained in this
 team.

 The devscripts package has tools to get in touch with authors of
 packages - e.g. the dd-list script (but possibly other tools as well).


  - Jonas


 I see that jquery-lazyload is listed on the mentioned [0] page as
 upstream: error.

 On my maintainer page [4] the watch column is correctly displaying
 1.9.3 in magenta (indicating a newer upstream version is published).
 Also, on the package's QA page [5] no error is shown about the watch
 file being broken and the following is listed: A new upstream version
 is available: 1.9.3, you should consider packaging it.

 I'm wondering if there is an issue or not?
+Emilien

Yep,

It looks like so...

You should file a bug against the qa.debian.org pseudo-package, with
user qa.debian@packages.debian.org and usertag udd.

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating wrong debian watch files

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi Jonas,

On 14 May 2014 09:28, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-05-14 09:18:09)
 in DMD[0] we have 53 packages with a broken watch file.

 I wrote a script[1] able to fix most of them.

 Nice work!

 Please beware that not all JavaScript packages are maintained in this
 team.

 The devscripts package has tools to get in touch with authors of
 packages - e.g. the dd-list script (but possibly other tools as well).


Do you mean:

be sure to have reached all maintainers

In other words: use dd-list and forward your email to co-maintainers?

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating wrong debian watch files

[Leo Iannacone]

On 14 May 2014 09:18, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
 I will forward new debian watch files to sepwatch[2] ASAP (about
 sepwatch[3]) in the meantime I updated the repository with wrong
 files.

I can't do this. Only DDs can push sepwatch repository.

Someone of you can do it for me?

In attachment the archive with watches to push.

Thanks in advance!

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25


pkg-javascript_sepwatch_files.tar.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
___
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating wrong debian watch files

[Leo Iannacone]

On 14 May 2014 14:03, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-05-14 13:12:31)
 On 14 May 2014 09:28, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-05-14 09:18:09)
 in DMD[0] we have 53 packages with a broken watch file.

 I wrote a script[1] able to fix most of them.

 Nice work!

 Please beware that not all JavaScript packages are maintained in this
 team.

 The devscripts package has tools to get in touch with authors of
 packages - e.g. the dd-list script (but possibly other tools as
 well).


 Do you mean:

 be sure to have reached all maintainers

 In other words: use dd-list and forward your email to co-maintainers?

 Almost.  More accurately I mean that it looks like you intended to share
 some information with the package maintainers of a bunch of packages -
 if that's the case then please consider using a tool like dd-list to
 better reach those developers (i.e. don't assume they follow this list).

 Your use of quotes in your follow-up email seems to indicate that you
 are referring to some documentation somewhere, perhaps one on best
 practice when doing a mas bug-filing.  I do not imply that you are
 necessarily doing a mass bug-filing so do not dictate you to use a
 specific procedure - I simply want to make you aware of tools that might
 be helpful for you in whatever it is you are trying to do here. :-)


Thank you for you help and explanations Jonas :)

I forwarded the first message to co-maintainers :)

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Updating wrong debian watch files

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi David!

On 14 May 2014 14:22, David Prévot da...@tilapin.org wrote:
 Hi Leo,

 Thanks for your QA work!

You welcome! :)

 Le 14/05/2014 03:18, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 = Already fixed or false positives =

 These ones:

  * OR have already a suggested debian/watch in sepwatch
  * OR the debian/watch is already fixed in the repository
  * OR at time I checked them, they had a temporary issue with their
 own watch file.
 [...]
  * pdf.js

 Do you have any idea about this issue? I mean, the watch file is
 effective, and the accurate next upstream version is correctly
 documented in the PTS and DDPO, but is in error according to UDD.

 Thanks in advance for any pointer or follow up with UDD maintainers.

Really not.

I looked at bugs in qa.debian.org, but I did not find anything relevant.


Someone can report this issue?


Regards,

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] JS policy: repackaging upstream tarball when minified js files are present (was: Call for review: should.js packages)

[Leo Iannacone]

On 7 May 2014 13:41, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 I guess I understand my confusion now:
 In the debate last 2 months, there were some pretty strong arguments
 advanced why keeping the minified files was breaking the social
 contract (and thus RC-worthy)
 I looks like now that it is not necessarily as black and white.

 That has not changed: Some (including me) pretty strongly believe that
 keeping the minified files (not breaks not the social contract but) is
 in violation of Debian Policy and thus worthy of release-candidate bugs.

 It is up to those choosing not to follow guidelines to defend their
 reasoning that that is not the case.  Just as before.


 Let's thus keep this as a recommendation/guideline/best practice for
 our team, and see how/if the debate comes to a resolution at the level
 of the entire project.

 Please note that I only claim guidelines can *help* avoid discussion -
 by either a) clearly documenting what is safe to do if you don't want
 trouble, or b) summarizing the essentials of one half of the debate -
 ideally cutting future threads in half.  Imagine threads where half the
 posts are shrunk to stuff like How is your $foo compliant with Debian
 Policy §§x.y?  Point $bar in our guideline addresses that..


 Who can put Jérémy's text at the location Jonas mentions?

 Anyone understanding how wiki works and able to get a wiki.debian.org
 user account. :-)


Hi all!

I edited these pages:

 * https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Policy (js policy)
 * https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Manual (nodejs policy)

And added the exclude-files paragraph (as reported in this
discussion) and reviewed the style.

If someone want to take a look, just to be sure I did not put any
false sentence..


All the best,

Leo.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#747654: Error: Cannot find module 'iscroll'

[Leo Iannacone]

Source: node-iscroll
Severity: important

Dear Maintainer,

ting your module as:

nodejs -e require('iscroll');

It fails and return:


module.js:340
throw err;
  ^
Error: Cannot find module 'iscroll'
at Function.Module._resolveFilename (module.js:338:15)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:280:25)
at Module.require (module.js:364:17)
at require (module.js:380:17)
at [eval]:1:1
at Object.anonymous ([eval]-wrapper:6:22)
at Module._compile (module.js:456:26)
at evalScript (node.js:532:25)
at startup (node.js:80:7)
at node.js:902:3


It seems you are missing a symlink:

/usr/lib/nodejs/iscroll/index.js - /usr/lib/nodejs/iscroll/iscroll.js


Moreover, it should not Recommds javascript-common (useless for
node-modules).

Regards,

Leo.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.13.0-24-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#747656: Error: Cannot find module 'uglify-js'

[Leo Iannacone]

Package: node-mirror
Severity: important

Dear Maintainer,

testing your module as:

nodejs -e require('mirror');

It fails and returns:

module.js:340
throw err;
  ^
Error: Cannot find module 'uglify-js'
at Function.Module._resolveFilename (module.js:338:15)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:280:25)
at Module.require (module.js:364:17)
at require (module.js:380:17)
at Object.anonymous (/usr/lib/nodejs/mirror.js:5:14)
at Module._compile (module.js:456:26)
at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:474:10)
at Module.load (module.js:356:32)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:312:12)
at Module.require (module.js:364:17)


It seems you are missing a Depends on 'node-uglify' package.

Regards,

Leo.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.13.0-24-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] About node-expect.js (ITP)

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

I have prepared node-expect.js[0].

But I have some doubt about ..

This module is not only for node.js module, but can be used also as
simple javascript in a browser (tested and it works).

So... should we provide also a libjs-expect.js package ?

If yes.. in this package should I make a link to node-module-file or
copy the file in  usr/share/javascript ?


Right now I have only node-expect.js and I did this in debian files:

debian/control:
Package: node-expect.js
Provides: libjs-expect.js

debian/links:
usr/lib/nodejs/expect.js/index.js usr/share/javascript/expect.js


Is it the wrong way to provide both javascript and node module at same time?


Best,

Leo.

[0] - http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/node-expect.js.git

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] About node-expect.js (ITP)

[Leo Iannacone]

On 8 May 2014 16:00, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-05-08 15:44:45)
 I have prepared node-expect.js[0].

 But I have some doubt about ..

 This module is not only for node.js module, but can be used also as
 simple javascript in a browser (tested and it works).

 So... should we provide also a libjs-expect.js package ?

 If yes.. in this package should I make a link to node-module-file or
 copy the file in usr/share/javascript ?


 Right now I have only node-expect.js and I did this in debian files:

 debian/control:
 Package: node-expect.js
 Provides: libjs-expect.js

 debian/links:
 usr/lib/nodejs/expect.js/index.js usr/share/javascript/expect.js


 Is it the wrong way to provide both javascript and node module at same
 time?

 libjs-* (but not node-*) code should be minified.

 libjs-* (but not node-*) packages should recommend javascript-common.

 node-* (but not libjs-*) packages should depend on nodejs.

 ...so even if code is identical, it seems better to me to ship as
 separate packages.

 (I seem to recall that I've made that same Provides: hack, but don't
 recall which package it was - I should fix it there too).


Thank you Jonas for the squeal...

I have added the libjs-expect.js package shipping expect[.min].js files :)

Ready for review :)

L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Naming node packages with binaries

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

AFAIK.. when a binary is present in a package, the package should have
the be named as the binary.

But.. this is not so clear for node modules.

For instance, for mocha, according with javascript policy, I should
ship a package called `node-mocha' rather than one simply called
`mocha'.

This seems to be in contrast with perl policy (I think with python too).

Should we follow this cli_based_name policy and rename those packages
having binaries ?

David Prevot suggests in chan:
taffit maybe a Provides: node-$stuff could help in the dependency
chain if needed

What do you think about ?

Ciao!

Leo

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#747277: Bug#747277: cannot start app: no method createServer

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi,

now in debian we have express 4.x.

 .createServer() has been deprecated since express 3.x, so you need to
update your app to the latest version (4.x) of express.

To achieve this purpose you way want to read this docs:

* https://github.com/visionmedia/express/wiki/Migrating-from-2.x-to-3.x
* https://github.com/visionmedia/express/wiki/Migrating-from-3.x-to-4.x

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] npm2deb - populating database

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

npm2deb uses a centralized sort-of database to trace some information
about tough node modules.

In details, at runtime, npm2deb downloads and parses this wiki page
[0], trying to get info from the JSON nestled in '{{{ }}}'.

For instance, try to run this:
 $  npm2deb depends wsend

wsends depends on through, and you will be warned about:

Warnings occured:
 [warning] through: through2 is better maintained, see node-jsonstream
for a patch


This should encourage developers to do not go crazy and, moreover, do
not repeat same error already did by someone else.

What I am asking here is: Please, help on populating and keeping
updated that page.

It could be really useful if you all report info about anomalies you
spotted in your packages, specifying, as reported in that page, one of
the three levels of 'warnings': error, warning, info.

Note that packages with no 'warning' message (like coffee-script and
uglify-js) are just considered as a link (map) between the npm
module-name and debian package-name.



All the best,

Leo.


[0] - https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Database

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 6 May 2014 08:01, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 I worked on it - and then stopped because we're missing component.js :(

Am I missing something? Why should we care about component ?

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 6 May 2014 08:01, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 I worked on it - and then stopped because we're missing component.js :(

Am I missing something? Why should we care about component ?


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 6 May 2014 08:01, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 I worked on it - and then stopped because we're missing component.js :(

Am I missing something? Why should we care about component ?

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] node-commander 2.2.0

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi Mike!

// adding cc JavaScript ML 'cause I'm adding some info on my work.

On 6 May 2014 16:57, Mike Gabriel mike.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de wrote:
 On  Di 06 Mai 2014 16:46:15 CEST, Leo Iannacone wrote:
 could I work on node-commander importing latest release?

That's great! :)

I will work on..

 Please do! May I ask what you are aiming at with all that heavy packaging
 activity? If you need a sponsor, ping me!

As I already said, I would like have Mocha (and other test-suits) in Debian...

Now, let's talk about test suits:

What's the main difference between npm and apt?
AFAIU, the first one permits to have/install more than one version of
packageX, while apt can only install (by default) the latest version
of a package.

So... what's happen when a module_X depends on a module_Y (version
1.0) and module_Y get a release (major) upgrade? We can't know..
unless if we tries to automatically do some check, maybe during
re-builds, having tests enabled for package.

After some search I have seen that most test frameworks used are:
 * Mocha
 * Should
 * NodeUnit
 * Expresso
 * jsUnit
 * Jasmine

So.. I'm trying to achieve this: enable tests during node-* packages
build phase in order to discover anomalies and help upstream to keep
their projects update with dependencies new releases.

Does this sound reasonable to your old_contributor ears or I am
wasting my (and yours) time?


Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Call for review: should.js packages

[Leo Iannacone]

Let's back on discussing should.js... :)

Is someone working on? :)

L.

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] node-iconv-2.1.0 done

[Leo Iannacone]

On 5 May 2014 12:34, Matthew Pideil matthew.pid...@teledetection.fr wrote:
 * install lib directory instead of lib/iconv.js
 * if not, fix the main path in package.json
 * or add debian/links with
   usr/lib/nodejs/iconv/iconv.js usr/lib/nodejs/iconv/index.js
 I don't understand what you suggest:
   How your first proposal will be understand without an index.js in
 /usr/lib/nodejs/iconv/ ?
   Is the package.json file interpreted and if so by 'who' ?

Hi Matthew,

you may want to read information reported in this wiki page:

https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs

Regards,

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

about source-map module,

I have found the following in lib/source-map/base64-vlq.js

/*
 * Copyright 2011 Mozilla Foundation and contributors
 * Licensed under the New BSD license. See LICENSE or:
 * http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause
 *
 * Based on the Base 64 VLQ implementation in Closure Compiler:
 * 
https://code.google.com/p/closure-compiler/source/browse/trunk/src/com/google/debugging/sourcemap/Base64VLQ.java
 *
 * Copyright 2011 The Closure Compiler Authors. All rights reserved.
 * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
 * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are
 * met:
 *
 *  * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
 *notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
 *  * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
 *copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following
 *disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided
 *with the distribution.
 *  * Neither the name of Google Inc. nor the names of its
 *contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived
 *from this software without specific prior written permission.
 *
 * THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
 * AS IS AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
 * LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
 * A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
 * OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
 * SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
 * LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
 * DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
 * THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
 * (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
 * OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
 */


The note says: Based on the Base 64 VLQ implementation in Closure Compiler,

should I report this in debian/copryright ?

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 5 May 2014 23:20, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 The note says: Based on the Base 64 VLQ implementation in Closure Compiler,

 should I report this in debian/copryright ?

 Yes, the file has two copyright holders (and two licenses which happen
 to be identical).

Good! (locally done, I will git push asap).

About node-css-parse .. Jeremy (do you want contribute maintaining the
package?).. ?
New css are now in upstream, but no new release with those changes.
What we should do?

L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] npm2deb in debian

[Leo Iannacone]

Hello there,

I'm looking for a sponsor for npm2deb:

http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/npm2deb.git

some python developer around?

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] npm2deb in debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 3 May 2014 17:40, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 If acceptable to use CDBS, I can review and help maintain the packaging.

 Fine for me.

Absolutely no problem for me :)

Thank you Jonas!


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 30 April 2014 22:25, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le mercredi 30 avril 2014 à 22:11 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 node-character-parser is ready here:

 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/node-character-parser.git

 The long description is not clear enough.
 Also it uses you where we expect something less personal.

Updated :).

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 1 May 2014 02:10, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le jeudi 01 mai 2014 à 01:11 +0200, Jérémy Lal a écrit :
 Le jeudi 01 mai 2014 à 00:18 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
  Quoting Leo Iannacone (2014-04-30 23:26:44)
   On 30 April 2014 23:11, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
It's not all right to remove other files without good reasons.
Here, you can have a doubt about the license of the other css file, but
there is no doubt the js file is correctly licensed, so no reason to
prune it.
  
   But ... does it make sense leave snip of code that does not work?
  
   I mean, if you `apt-get source' the package you will see run
   bechmark/index.js. You may want to exec it.. and then??
   It fails.. because try to open large.css, excluded from source.
  
   $ grep css benchmark/index.js
   var small = fs.readFileSync('benchmark/small.css', 'utf8');
   var large = fs.readFileSync('benchmark/large.css', 'utf8')
  
   Is it not better in this case remove the whole directory?
 
  The better approach is not to remove more code, but to complement the
  minimal code stripping with a patch that makes the remaining code work
  again.

 Even better, let's bug upstream about that. After all they have no
 interest in keeping licensing issues.

 https://github.com/reworkcss/css-parse/issues/84

 I'll file a PR later, let's see what happens.

Thanks you both :)

Have a great day!

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Socket.io and node-ws, node-options module

[Leo Iannacone]

After some investigation, I discovered upstream is developing a new
release major 1.0.0.

I guess it is better wait for it. Dependencies are deeply changing in
the master branch:

https://github.com/LearnBoost/socket.io/blob/master/package.json

Best,

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Debian node-express

[Leo Iannacone]

On 30 April 2014 02:39, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Interesting.

Really, which tools do you use to inspect files covered by some
copyright in a software?


 It's now accessible (thank you Leo) from the Nodejs page, as best
 practice manual:
 https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Manual

 it is far from perfect, though.

I know MoinMoin, you know Policy, so... If you write me something in
any language (text formatting syntax) I will more then happy to
translate it in MoinMoin :)


 If /usr/lib/nodejs/express/package.json exists, nodejs uses it to find
 the entry point of the module.

Here more info about:
http://nodejs.org/api/modules.html#modules_folders_as_modules

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

I would like to make mocha available in debian:
https://github.com/visionmedia/mocha

To do that, we need jade, which is required by mocha as dependency.

If you want help, here the task page about packaging jade:

https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Tasks/Jade

Regards,

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] About node browserify

[Leo Iannacone]

Node browserify is a kind of software which makes node modules
compatible and runnable for browsers.

It seems many modules use it, so it would be nice package it.

I have taken a look, and it madly depends on dozens of packages/modules[0].

My question is:

do you know if exist something else which does the same job (with less
depends)?
If yes, should we find a way to patch modules using browserify to
force them using the alternative software?


Have a great day,
Leo.


[0] $ npm2deb depends -r browserify
Dependencies:
NPM   Debian
browserify (3.44.2)   None
├─ inherits (~2.0.1)  node-inherits (2.0.0-1)
├─ subarg (0.0.1) None
│  └─ minimist (~0.0.7)   None
├─ defined (~0.0.0)   None
├─ deep-equal (~0.1.0)None
├─ shell-quote (~0.0.1)   None
│  ├─ array-filter (~0.0.0)   None
│  ├─ jsonify (~0.0.0)None
│  ├─ array-reduce (~0.0.0)   None
│  └─ array-map (~0.0.0)  None
├─ syntax-error (~1.1.0)  None
│  └─ esprima-fb (3001.1.0-dev-harmony-fb)None
├─ timers-browserify (~1.0.1) None
│  └─ process (~0.5.1)None
├─ crypto-browserify (~1.0.9) None
│  └─ sha.js (2.1.3)  None
│ └─ native-buffer-browserify (~2.0.8)None
│├─ ieee754 (~1.1.1)  None
│└─ base64-js (~0.0.4)None
├─ os-browserify (~0.1.1) None
├─ punycode (~1.2.3)  None
├─ vm-browserify (~0.0.1) None
│  └─ indexof (0.0.1) None
├─ browser-resolve (~1.2.1)   None
│  └─ resolve (0.6.3) node-resolve (0.3.1-1)
├─ builtins (~0.0.3)  None
├─ stream-browserify (~0.1.0) None
│  ├─ inherits (~2.0.1)   node-inherits (2.0.0-1)
│  └─ process (~0.5.1)None
├─ umd (~2.0.0)   None
│  ├─ ruglify (~1.0.0)None
│  │  ├─ uglify-js (~2.2) uglifyjs (1.3.4-1)
│  │  └─ rfile (~1.0) None
│  │ ├─ callsite (~1.0.0) None
│  │ └─ resolve (~0.3.0)  node-resolve (0.3.1-1)
│  ├─ through (~2.3.4)None
│  ├─ rfile (~1.0.0)  None
│  │  ├─ callsite (~1.0.0)None
│  │  └─ resolve (~0.3.0) node-resolve (0.3.1-1)
│  └─ uglify-js (~2.4.0)  uglifyjs (1.3.4-1)
├─ concat-stream (~1.4.1) None
│  ├─ inherits (~2.0.1)   node-inherits (2.0.0-1)
│  ├─ typedarray (~0.0.5) None
│  └─ readable-stream (~1.1.9)None
│ ├─ isarray (0.0.1)  None
│ ├─ string_decoder (~0.10.x) None
│ ├─ inherits (~2.0.1)node-inherits (2.0.0-1)
│ └─ core-util-is (~1.0.0)None
├─ module-deps (~1.10.0)  None
│  ├─ detective (~3.1.0)  None
│  │  ├─ esprima-fb (3001.1.0-dev-harmony-fb) None
│  │  └─ escodegen (~1.1.0)   None
│  │ ├─ source-map (~0.1.33)  None
│  │ │  └─ amdefine (=0.0.4) None
│  │ ├─ estraverse (~1.5.0)   None
│  │ ├─ esprima (~1.1.1)  None
│  │ └─ esutils (~1.0.0)  None
│  ├─ resolve (~0.6.0)node-resolve (0.3.1-1)
│  ├─ minimist (~0.0.5)   None
│  ├─ concat-stream (~1.4.1)  None
│  │  ├─ inherits (~2.0.1)node-inherits (2.0.0-1)
│  │  ├─ typedarray (~0.0.5)  None
│  │  └─ readable-stream (~1.1.9) None
│  │ ├─ isarray (0.0.1)   None
│  │ ├─ string_decoder (~0.10.x)  None
│  │ ├─ inherits (~2.0.1) node-inherits (2.0.0-1)
│  │ └─ core-util-is (~1.0.0) None
│  ├─ through (~2.3.4)None
│  ├─ JSONStream (~0.7.1) None
│  │  ├─ through (=2.2.7 3) None
│  │  └─ jsonparse (0.0.5)None
│  ├─ parents (0.0.2) None
│  └─ browser-resolve (~1.2.2)None
│ └─ resolve (0.6.3)  node-resolve (0.3.1-1)
├─ https-browserify (~0.0.0)  None
├─ 

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Socket.io and node-ws, node-options module

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi Mike!

On 30 April 2014 10:27, Mike Gabriel mike.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de wrote:
 you could start with preparing packages for the new dependencies...

I will start with the devDependencies:

  devDependencies: {
mocha: 1.16.2,
expect.js: 0.3.1,
supertest: 0.8.2,
superagent: 0.17.0,
istanbul: 0.2.3
  },

Leo.



-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#745687: Bug#745687: Bug#745687: new upstream version (2.x series)

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi Jonas,

On 30 April 2014 02:10, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Status of packaging is that these libraries needs packaging first:

   node-source-map
   node-uglify-to-browserify

About node-uglify-to-browserify:
You do not really need to package it, since it's only related to
uglify2.x (it has no reverse-dependency)
I think you can bundle it as a patch along with uglify v2.x.


About node-source-map:
It build-depends on dryice (=0.4.8). You can find a pre-release
package in pkg-javascript/node-dryice.git repository.
Once it done/uploaded to unstable, we will be able to build source-map.

Regards,

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#745687: Bug#745687: Bug#745687: Bug#745687: new upstream version (2.x series)

[Leo Iannacone]

On 30 April 2014 12:53, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 About node-source-map:
 It build-depends on dryice (=0.4.8). You can find a pre-release
 package in pkg-javascript/node-dryice.git repository.
 Once it done/uploaded to unstable, we will be able to build source-map.

 I can help about that, but could you find out about the dependency loop:
 dryice depends on uglify-js

Fortunately depends on uglify-js version '~1.3.4' :)


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

node-character-parser is ready here:

http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/node-character-parser.git

On 30 April 2014 21:48, Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
 node-css-parse is ready here:

 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/node-css-parse.git



-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Mocha in Debian

[Leo Iannacone]

On 30 April 2014 22:20, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Le mercredi 30 avril 2014 à 21:48 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit :
 node-css-parse is ready here:

 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/node-css-parse.git

 * upstream is actually
 https://github.com/reworkcss/css-parse

You're right, visionmedia repo actually redirects on reworkcss.
Fixed.

 * benchmarks/large.css must be excluded, for it contains way too much
 unlicensed styles

Added to copyright:
Files-Excluded:
benchmark

We do not need any of them.


Regards,

L.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Debian Maintainer Dashboard rss2emails

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

I have setup a rss2emails service for my own Debian Maintainer Dashboard.

rss2emails is a kind of service which triggers an email for each
new-entry in a rss feed.

If you like this, I could send also emails to this mailing list about
pkg-javascript dashboard:

http://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=pkg-javascript-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.org

The rss feed is:

http://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=pkg-javascript-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.orgemail2=email3=packages=ignpackages=format=rss#todo

Let me know in case.

L.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Debian node-express

[Leo Iannacone]

On 29 April 2014 12:20, Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk wrote:
 Sorry if that was not obvious: The reason I prefer that you revert is
 indeed because I am still interested in helping maintain that package.

Great!.

I reverted package to cdbs. Since I do not really know it, can you
please take a look at debian/rules ensuring everything is correct?

Best,

Leo.

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Socket.io and node-ws, node-options module

[Leo Iannacone]

About the packages' name.

Would you use 'node-socket.io' or 'node-socketio' ??

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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Socket.io and node-ws, node-options module

[Leo Iannacone]

On 29 April 2014 23:39, Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org wrote:
 Would you use 'node-socket.io' or 'node-socketio' ??

 No need to remove the dot, per
 https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Source

Thanks Jeremy!..

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#745687:

[Leo Iannacone]

We need some new dependency get packaged for Debian:

$ npm2deb depends -r uglify-js
Module uglify-js has no build dependencies.
Dependencies:
NPM Debian
source-map (~0.1.33)None
 - amdefine (=0.0.4)   None
async (~0.2.6)  node-async (0.2.5-1)
uglify-to-browserify (~1.0.0)   None
optimist (~0.3.5)   node-optimist (0.3.5-1)

To actual maintainers: you're still interested in this package?

L.

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Call for review: should.js packages

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all,

someone could sponsor me this package:

http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/should.js.git

?

Thanks in advance.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#744728: node-express 4.0 released

[Leo Iannacone]

Package: node-express
Version: 2.5.9-2
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

a new version of node-express has been released.

The new release 4.0 brings new important changes.

Now express no longer depens on connect framework, which
has been splitted in different projects.

Eeach middleware now is a module by stands on own itself.

I will start packaging new depends according with package.json

 dependencies: {
parseurl: 1.0.1,
accepts: 1.0.1,
type-is: 1.1.0,
range-parser: 1.0.0,
cookie: 0.1.1,
buffer-crc32: 0.2.1,
fresh: 0.2.2,
methods: 0.1.0,
send: 0.2.0,
cookie-signature: 1.0.3,
merge-descriptors: 0.0.2,
utils-merge: 1.0.0,
escape-html: 1.0.1,
qs: 0.6.6,
serve-static: 1.0.4,
path-to-regexp: 0.1.2,
debug: = 0.7.3  1
  },

All the best,

Leo.


-- System Information:
** of the template - remove these template lines ***
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers trusty-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'trusty-updates'), (500, 'trusty'), (100, 
'trusty-backports')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.13.0-24-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages node-express depends on:
ii  node-connect  1.7.3-1
ii  node-mime 1.2.11-1
ii  node-mkdirp   0.3.5-1
ii  node-qs   0.6.5-1
ii  nodejs0.10.25~dfsg2-2ubuntu1

node-express recommends no packages.

node-express suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#742726: ejs.js: New upstream release 1.0.0

[Leo Iannacone]

Source: ejs.js
Severity: wishlist

Dear Maintainer,

can you please consider to update ejs.js to 1.0.0 version?

Thanks in advance.

Leo.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers trusty-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'trusty-updates'), (500, 'trusty'), (500, 'saucy-updates'), 
(500, 'saucy'), (100, 'trusty-backports'), (100, 'saucy-backports')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.13.0-19-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#742178:

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi Jérémy,

I'm going to start working on this.

Is there some workflow in javascript maintainers you prefer I would follow ?

Or just pull my packages in the mentors sponsors queue ?

All the best,

Leo.


-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] npm2deb - a script to make faster and easier packaging nodejs modules

[Leo Iannacone]

Hi all!

This is Leo (from Italy), a long time Ubuntu/Debian contributor.

I have recently worked with nodejs and developed an interface for Deb-o-Matic.
I found it easy to learn and (thanks to npm) a really complete framework.

Anyway ... while I was starting to use some node_module locally I
figured out how many of them are not still packaged for debian.
So, I would like to give you a hand (if you need).

For this I started to develop a script `npm2deb`[0] (python) which get
information about module from npm and write down a base for the
debian/* files automatically.

It seems work fine (at least with simple modules, like node-bytes or similiar).

Would you like test it and give me a feedback ?

All the best,

Leo.

[0] - https://github.com/LeoIannacone/npm2deb/

-- 
Ubuntu Member - http://launchpad.net/~l3on
Home Page - http://leoiannacone.com
GPG Key Id - 0xD282FC25

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

[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#742178: node-express: Please update node-express to the latest release

[Leo Iannacone]

Package: node-express
Version: 2.5.9-2
Severity: wishlist

Dear Maintainer,

According with github, there are many release during last years
you have not packaged.

https://github.com/visionmedia/express/releases

(and moreover your watch file seems broken).

Can you please consider to update your package?

Leo.

PS: if you need help let me know.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers trusty-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'trusty-updates'), (500, 'trusty'), (500, 'saucy-updates'), 
(500, 'saucy'), (100, 'trusty-backports'), (100, 'saucy-backports')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.13.0-18-generic (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages node-express depends on:
ii  node-connect  1.7.3-1
ii  node-mime 1.2.11-1
ii  node-mkdirp   0.3.5-1
ii  node-qs   0.6.5-1
ii  nodejs0.10.25~dfsg2-2

node-express recommends no packages.

node-express suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

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