Hi Patrick,
On 12-05-03 at 05:28pm, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> >
> > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among
> > hams, so much so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and
> > even HTs (Handy-Talkie
On 12-05-03 at 10:40am, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Patrick Ouellette writes:
> > How many people use Node.js? I had never heard of it until this
> > came up, and I work in IT with web development teams.
>
> Relative numbers really isn't the point, and I'm sorry I distracted us
> all with that. The
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 09:03:55AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du vendredi 04 mai 2012, vers 06:11,
> Hamish Moffatt disait :
>
> > Secondly if node.js is usually just used via #!, I'm not sure why it's in
> > $PATH at all - why not in /usr/lib?
>
> Neithe
Hi Pau,
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 04:24:21PM +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> Regarding the often-mentioned "many users run 'node script' from the
> command-line"... so what? If we can get enough distributions (Debian,
> Suse, Fedora, MacPorts and brew would likely be enough) to rename the
> node
The Fungi writes:
> I think this is part of the misunderstanding. If these systems are nodes
> on an AX.25 network, what's being renamed (and potentially broken) is
> the userspace binary which connects the machine to the network. Think of
> it as if you're suggesting a rename of /usr/sbin/sshd t
Hi,
What are other distributions doing?
I've check and OpenSuse apparently lives happy with having
/usr/sbin/node for axnode and /usr/bin/node for node.js. Has anyone
contacted them about this?
Regarding the often-mentioned "many users run 'node script' from the
command-line"... so what? If we c
On 2012-05-04 09:03:19 +0100 (+0100), Jon Dowland wrote:
[...]
> So some form of access to the machine would be required to create
> the problem, be it physical or remote. The same access should be
> used to fix the problem.
[...]
I think this is part of the misunderstanding. If these systems are
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:20:46PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 10:11:41PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >
> > > You also don't address the issue of a user who installs both packages
> > > and now gets varying behavior depending on their $PATH - a result not
> > > of
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 02:26:33PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> One of the considerable costs involves the number of systems in place in
> the ham community that are not easily physically accessible should the
> upgrade/change break the system. These systems may be on mountain tops,
> high bu
OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du vendredi 04 mai 2012, vers 06:11,
Hamish Moffatt disait :
> Secondly if node.js is usually just used via #!, I'm not sure why it's in
> $PATH at all - why not in /usr/lib?
Neither "#!/usr/bin/node" nor "#!/usr/bin/env node" will work then.
--
Vincent Ber
Quoting Patrick Ouellette (poue...@debian.org):
> Can someone please explain to be why it is so unpalatable to
> have the Node.js package in the README and in an installation/
> configuration message include the following (or similar) message:
("last minute debconf addition hater" hat ON)
Please
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:28:29PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> >
> > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among hams, so
> > much
> > so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and even HTs
> > (Ha
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:46:09PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 16:46:09 -0500
> From: Peter Samuelson
> Subject: Re: Node.js and it's future in debian
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, Patrick Ouellette ,
> Andrew Starr-Bochicchio
>
>
On Thursday, May 03, 2012 17:28:29, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among hams, so
> > much so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and even HTs
> > (Handy-Talkies).
> >
[David Weinehall]
> So... A (admittedly expensive) pre-inst script that checks the
> system for calls to /usr/sbin/node outside of Debian packages would
> likely do the trick?
That seems like a pretty big violation of the spirit, and possibly the
letter, of Debian Policy.
I mean, why not just t
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 05:13:09PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
>
> Drat. I forgot about APRS. APRS has become fairly popular among hams, so
> much
> so that it now comes built-in to several radios, and even HTs (Handy-Talkies).
>
> APRS is a system for location reporting. It's also very common
On Thursday, May 03, 2012 16:32:08, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:21:16PM +0100, Colin Tuckley wrote:
...
> > What you are also ignoring here is that AX25 packet is pretty much dead
> > in Ham radio.
>
> No, I am not ignoring the ax25 packet status in ham radio. When I pos
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 03:34:59PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 03:09:42PM -0400, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote:
> >
> > It has been said many times that the impact on users will be limited
> > as node is not meant to be called directly but by inetd. You and other
> >
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 03:09:42PM -0400, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote:
>
> It has been said many times that the impact on users will be limited
> as node is not meant to be called directly but by inetd. You and other
> members of the ham radio community seem to feel that there would be an
> impa
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:21:16PM +0100, Colin Tuckley wrote:
> Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 21:21:16 +0100
> From: Colin Tuckley
> Subject: Re: Node.js and it's future in debian
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> On 03/05/12 20:44, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
>
> &g
On 03/05/12 20:44, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> With all due respect, you can make the same argument for the Node.js
> package to do this. Node.js is not currently in the stable distribution
> while node is (apparently this does not have any bearing on the discussion).
node might be in stable but
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 10:11:41PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> > You also don't address the issue of a user who installs both packages
> > and now gets varying behavior depending on their $PATH - a result not
> > of a local administrator's action, but of the Debian package's actions.
>
> If
On Thu, 03 May 2012, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> With all due respect, you can make the same argument for the Node.js
> package to do this.
Yes, but it would not be a transitional backward-compatibility symlink. It
would be a symlink that would have to remain forever and that is required
even for n
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:24:00PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> So to avoid disruptions, you rename the binary in the package and in the
> "postinst configure " which is run during upgrade, you add a
> symlink from /usr/sbin/node to ax25-node and you display a prominent
> warning explaining t
Can someone please explain to be why it is so unpalatable to
have the Node.js package in the README and in an installation/
configuration message include the following (or similar) message:
Node.js in Debian has the executable name /usr/bin/nodejs
This is to solve a conflict with a package that st
OoO En ce début de soirée du jeudi 03 mai 2012, vers 21:11, Patrick
Ouellette disait :
>> Yes, they are. But we need to find a solution that will work for almost
>> every one and this solution seems to exist.
>>
> Can you please elaborate on the solution that seems to exist? All I have
>
Hi,
On Thu, 03 May 2012, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> This is from the linux-hams list where I asked about changing the name of
> node:
>
> "From my experience, many MANY Linux hams have customized scripts that
> startup some very elaborate HAM systems. For many, these scripts
> weren't written b
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 08:48:07PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> OoO Pendant le repas du jeudi 03 mai 2012, vers 19:35, Patrick Ouellette
> disait :
>
> >> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a
> >> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> Please understand, it is not a "reluctance to undergo this transition."
> I am being asked to make Debian incompatible with the previous 13 years
> of functionality, and cause a significant impact on a user community.
> This is not somethi
OoO Pendant le repas du jeudi 03 mai 2012, vers 19:35, Patrick Ouellette
disait :
>> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a
>> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen,
>> again, as the one harming a community, like this may happen in the
>>
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 02:35:06PM -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote:
>
> So while I don't think decisions shouldn't be taken based solely on
> popcon stats, I think it would be silly to think that ham radio would
> be more popular than node.js. I understand you're reluctant to undergo
> this transition
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 01:10:24PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>>
>> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a
>> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen,
>> again, as the one harming
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> The first part I shouldn't have said, since it's really a distraction.
> I'm sorry about that.
>
> For the second, that's what the documentation of the binary says, as
> previously posted to this thread. Is that not the case?
>
> Relative nu
Patrick Ouellette writes:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> That community is much smaller, and the binary isn't invoked directly
>> by users, which makes the impact fairly minimal in practice.
> Can you support that assertion with data?
The first part I shouldn
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 01:10:24PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>
> As said many times, node is an interpreter used in shebang. Using a
> different name would just upset its user base. Debian will be seen,
> again, as the one harming a community, like this may happen in the
> Ruby community becaus
Hi,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> I can find numbers of potential node users by examining the number of
> active amateur radio licenses and make educated guesses as to how many
> may be using the ham radio node software as either a user of the system
> or a system pro
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> That community is much smaller, and the binary isn't invoked directly by
> users, which makes the impact fairly minimal in practice.
>
Can you support that assertion with data? I'm not talking installed
instances in Debian, but i
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 09:08:23AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Thomas Goirand writes:
> > On 05/02/2012 06:00 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> and the binary isn't invoked directly by users
>
> > If the binary isn't invoked directly by the users, why do we have a
> > problem? Why can't a patch
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 05/02/2012 06:00 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> and the binary isn't invoked directly by users
> If the binary isn't invoked directly by the users, why do we have a
> problem? Why can't a patch be introduced so that the binary doesn't live
> in a user accessible path (eg:
Bernd Zeimetz writes:
> If one of the maintainers disagrees with a solution you did not come to
> a consensus.
No, this is not true. Consensus does not mean unanimity, and the Policy
dictate is (in my opinion with my Policy delegate hat on) referring to a
consensus of the project, not a consens
On 05/02/2012 06:00 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> and the binary isn't invoked directly by
> users
If the binary isn't invoked directly by the users,
why do we have a problem? Why can't a patch be
introduced so that the binary doesn't live in a
user accessible path (eg: not in /usr/bin)?
Thomas
--
Le 03.05.2012 09:19, Bernd Zeimetz a écrit :
On 05/01/2012 11:32 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Sorry, I don't understand the above sentence. Do you mean that it
is
impossible to come to a consensus when one maintainer of a relevant
package disagrees? I can understand that claim, but it doesn't
On 05/01/2012 11:32 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>>> Wait, really? What happened to respect by maintainers for the
>>> project?
>>
>> "The project" is not "a set of random maintainers who have a filename
>
On 2012-05-02 14:49:09 +0200 (+0200), Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> On the other hand, if renaming both of them is the only possible
> outcome if both parties cannot agree, it makes it more likely both
> sides will actually be willing to discuss the matter, instead of
> just issuing demands, hoping the
On 02/05/2012 14:49, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Russ Allbery [120501 19:28]:
>> I have to admit that I'm tempted to change Policy from "if there's no
>> consensus, rename both of them" to "if there's no consensus, try harder to
>> reach a consensus, and the technical committee decides in last res
* Russ Allbery [120501 19:28]:
> I have to admit that I'm tempted to change Policy from "if there's no
> consensus, rename both of them" to "if there's no consensus, try harder to
> reach a consensus, and the technical committee decides in last resort."
>
> Most of the time, renaming both of them
Hi again,
Steve Langasek wrote:
> [Dropped Cc; what does any of this have to do with the DPL?]
I was alerting him to a conversation that was going nowhere fast,
in the hope that he might use his power to
participate in discussions amongst the Developers in a helpful
way
It has
* Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 16:55 -0400]:
> I was under the impression that neither package was going to move forward with
> a binary named "node"
Some proposed this, some agreed, others did not.
In the just reported bug #671120 I wrote regarding this neither package
should get the name part
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 01:07:11AM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 01:07:11 +0200
> From: Carsten Hey
> Subject: Re: Node.js and it's future in debian
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Mail-Followup-To: Carsten Hey ,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:26:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> > Contrast that with the positive actitude of the NFS developers of CITI
> > at UMichi when heimdal-dev and libgssapi-dev both contained
> > /usr/lib/libgssapi.a [1]. They went to the trouble of renaming libgssapi
> > to libgssglue.
[Dropped Cc; what does any of this have to do with the DPL?]
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 04:32:49PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> >> Wait, really? What happened to respect by maintainers for the
> >> proje
Patrick Ouellette writes:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:26:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Indeed, and I'm very grateful for that. But realistically that was
>> also a lot easier than renaming Node.js's interpreter, and I think the
>> CITI folks did actually know that was coming. The conflict
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 03:31:02AM +0200, Carl Fürstenberg wrote:
>
> There has been an log struggle between the nodejs package and the node
> package, which is still unresolved (bug #611698 for example) And I
> wonder now what the future should look like.
>
> To summarize the problem:
> * the no
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Wait, really? What happened to respect by maintainers for the
>> project?
>
> "The project" is not "a set of random maintainers who have a filename
> conflict with you".
Sorry, I don't understand the abov
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:30:50PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > I was talking about a consensus among the maintainers of the affected
> > packages. Even if all but the maintainers of one of the affected
> > packages would agree to a solution, there would be no way to implement
> > this soluti
Carsten Hey wrote:
> I was talking about a consensus among the maintainers of the affected
> packages. Even if all but the maintainers of one of the affected
> packages would agree to a solution, there would be no way to implement
> this solution without asking the tech-ctte or (what would be not
* Jonathan Nieder [2012-05-01 12:57 -0500]:
> Carsten Hey wrote:
>
> > I don't think that there ever will be a consensus in all those
> > discussions without discussing in a reasonable way (which failed in the
> > past multiple times).
>
> Note that a consensus does not imply everyone agreeing.
I
Carsten Hey wrote:
> I don't think that there ever will be a consensus in all those
> discussions without discussing in a reasonable way (which failed in the
> past multiple times).
Note that a consensus does not imply everyone agreeing. I am starting
to see a consensus already and would welcome
Carsten Hey writes:
> The origin of what the policy suggests to do if there is no consensus is
> a mail from Guy Maor <879142cjni@slip-61-16.ots.utexas.edu>, in
> which he writes:
> | That's basically a stick to force developers to reach a consensus.
> Christian Schwarz uploaded this change
* Carsten Hey [2012-05-01 01:07 +0200]:
> Only Hamish, who did not respond to this issue, uploaded
> node once in 2005,
I need to correct myself, Hamish replied once. In
<20110208230458.ga23...@risingsoftware.com> he wrote:
| I think renaming the node binary to axnode is reasonable and
| consiste
* Carl Fürstenberg [2012-04-28 03:31 +0200]:
> There has been an log struggle between the nodejs package and the node
> package, which is still unresolved (bug #611698 for example) And I
> wonder now what the future should look like.
In short I think that there is only one sane solution to this an
On Saturday, April 28, 2012 13:23:21, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> > I also am biased in one direction but shall not say which as I see no
> > benefit at this point in rehashing the discussion: Both packaging
> > "camps" have clearly demonstrated a lack of interest in letting t
* Carl Fürstenberg [2012-04-28 03:31 +0200]
> The the hamradio package "node" shipping a binary called "node", and
> as it's so old, the developers argue that the package must ship
> a binary called "node" or breakage will occur.
Upstream's INSTALL file contains:
| Node is intended to be called fr
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> I also am biased in one direction but shall not say which as I see no
> benefit at this point in rehashing the discussion: Both packaging
> "camps" have clearly demonstrated a lack of interest in letting the
> other use the name "node", which means we must both step
"brian m. carlson" writes:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> 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
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:41:36AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> >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 l
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:14:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Carl Fürstenberg 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 m
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:14:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
[nodejs's vs. hamradio's /usr/bin/node]
> In an ideal world, *neither* application would be using "node", since it's
> a very generic name
You could rename the binary in both packages and then ask the user via
debconf and/or alternativ
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar writes:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:14:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> In an ideal world, *neither* application would be using "node", since
>> it's a very generic name, but the reality is that people go off and do
>> things without paying attention to our naming polic
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:14:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Carl Fürstenberg 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
Carl Fürstenberg 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 b
71 matches
Mail list logo
