On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:14:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Carl Fürstenberg <azat...@gmail.com> writes: > > > As I'm not a hamradio user, I'm off course biased towards letting nodejs > > having the "node" binary and let it pass to testing. But we must find a > > solution to this, as nodejs is getting more and more used, and > > developers are forced to install nodejs from source to be able to use it > > instead of install it via the package manager. > > This increasingly feels like the same situation as Git: yes, another > utility was first, but the usage of one is a tiny fraction of the usage of > the other, and people expecting to use a common package expect it to be > available under that name and think poorly of Debian when it doesn't just > work.
>From a purely pragmatic POV, how many people are using both packages? If the answer is zero, and this seems relatively likely, can't we just add a Conflicts/Breaks and be done with it. Not a great solution, but it doesn't seem like there's a better one if both camps are unwilling to change. Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools `- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120428094136.gh28...@codelibre.net
