Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] nodejs-legacy rename

[Jérémy Lal]

2016-02-27 15:27 GMT+01:00 Jérémy Lal :

>
>
> 2016-02-27 15:11 GMT+01:00 Jonas Smedegaard :
>
>> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 14:40:50)
>> > 2016-02-27 13:16 GMT+01:00 Jonas Smedegaard :
>> >> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 10:25:44)
>> >>> no newcomers ever find out that nodejs-legacy provides the
>> >>> nodejs -> node
>> >>> symlink.
>> >>>
>> >>> It is probably because the name of this package is badly chosen. Any
>> >>> suggestion ?
>> >>>
>> >>> nodejs-symlink-node ?
>> >>
>> >> I find the package name descriptive: It accurately frames the _main_
>> >> trait of that package which is that it is for _legacy_ use only.
>> >>
>> >
>> > "legacy" can only be understood if one knows that it refers to the
>> > fact it was renamed.
>>
>> The place to expand on the meaning of a package name is package
>> description(s - short and long) - not package name itself.
>>
>>
>> > This leads to users manually adding the symlink,
>>
>> I strongly disagree: What leads to users manually adding a symlink is
>> *not* a bad choice of package name, but instead the underlying reason
>> for the package existing at all: Debian choosing to rename the binary.
>>
>> Those manually adding a symlink probably follow advice from people
>> disagreeing with the Debian naming of the binary, and therefore from
>> people unlikely to change their advice based on some package rename.
>>
>
> I disagree with your opinion: you see malice where i see ignorance, read
> for
> example
> https://github.com/santinic/how2/issues/24#issuecomment-189619467
>
> Though it's true that i could ask for a bit more nodejs upstream
> documentation.
>

That piece of information was already on upstream documentation site, though
said in a confusing way.
This tries to improve their formulation:
https://github.com/nodejs/nodejs.org/pull/542

So i step back from my original idea: nodejs-legacy is already enough
documented
that it would just add more confusion to rename it.

- Jérémy
___
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] nodejs-legacy rename

[Jérémy Lal]

2016-02-27 15:11 GMT+01:00 Jonas Smedegaard :

> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 14:40:50)
> > 2016-02-27 13:16 GMT+01:00 Jonas Smedegaard :
> >> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 10:25:44)
> >>> no newcomers ever find out that nodejs-legacy provides the
> >>> nodejs -> node
> >>> symlink.
> >>>
> >>> It is probably because the name of this package is badly chosen. Any
> >>> suggestion ?
> >>>
> >>> nodejs-symlink-node ?
> >>
> >> I find the package name descriptive: It accurately frames the _main_
> >> trait of that package which is that it is for _legacy_ use only.
> >>
> >
> > "legacy" can only be understood if one knows that it refers to the
> > fact it was renamed.
>
> The place to expand on the meaning of a package name is package
> description(s - short and long) - not package name itself.
>
>
> > This leads to users manually adding the symlink,
>
> I strongly disagree: What leads to users manually adding a symlink is
> *not* a bad choice of package name, but instead the underlying reason
> for the package existing at all: Debian choosing to rename the binary.
>
> Those manually adding a symlink probably follow advice from people
> disagreeing with the Debian naming of the binary, and therefore from
> people unlikely to change their advice based on some package rename.
>

I disagree with your opinion: you see malice where i see ignorance, read for
example
https://github.com/santinic/how2/issues/24#issuecomment-189619467

Though it's true that i could ask for a bit more nodejs upstream
documentation.

- Jérémy
___
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] nodejs-legacy rename

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 14:40:50)
> 2016-02-27 13:16 GMT+01:00 Jonas Smedegaard :
>> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 10:25:44)
>>> no newcomers ever find out that nodejs-legacy provides the
>>> nodejs -> node
>>> symlink.
>>>
>>> It is probably because the name of this package is badly chosen. Any 
>>> suggestion ?
>>>
>>> nodejs-symlink-node ?
>>
>> I find the package name descriptive: It accurately frames the _main_ 
>> trait of that package which is that it is for _legacy_ use only.
>>
>
> "legacy" can only be understood if one knows that it refers to the 
> fact it was renamed.

The place to expand on the meaning of a package name is package 
description(s - short and long) - not package name itself.


> This leads to users manually adding the symlink,

I strongly disagree: What leads to users manually adding a symlink is 
*not* a bad choice of package name, but instead the underlying reason 
for the package existing at all: Debian choosing to rename the binary.

Those manually adding a symlink probably follow advice from people 
disagreeing with the Debian naming of the binary, and therefore from 
people unlikely to change their advice based on some package rename.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


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

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] nodejs-legacy rename

[Jérémy Lal]

2016-02-27 13:16 GMT+01:00 Jonas Smedegaard :

> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 10:25:44)
> > no newcomers ever find out that nodejs-legacy provides the
> > nodejs -> node
> > symlink.
> >
> > It is probably because the name of this package is badly chosen.
> > Any suggestion ?
> >
> > nodejs-symlink-node ?
>
> I find the package name descriptive: It accurately frames the _main_
> trait of that package which is that it is for _legacy_ use only.
>

"legacy" can only be understood if one knows that it refers to the fact it
was renamed.
For example it could refer to an old version, so users not aware just don't
look into it.
This leads to users manually adding the symlink, often in the wrong place
(like in /usr/bin),
which then leads to more problems.
Something like
"nodejs-legacy-name"
could be just the right hint.
It would be easy to transition to it, since no other packages depend on it.




> What we might instead consider improve is short/long description fields.
>

Indeed, and also make sure it is correctly explained in both nodejs/npm
README.Debian.

- Jérémy
___
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] nodejs-legacy rename

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Jérémy Lal (2016-02-27 10:25:44)
> no newcomers ever find out that nodejs-legacy provides the
> nodejs -> node
> symlink.
> 
> It is probably because the name of this package is badly chosen.
> Any suggestion ?
> 
> nodejs-symlink-node ?

I find the package name descriptive: It accurately frames the _main_ 
trait of that package which is that it is for _legacy_ use only.

What we might instead consider improve is short/long description fields.

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


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