* Josselin Mouette [2011-11-16 18:23]:
> Reality check: it is not a question of number of users, but a question
> of which package has the most stubborn maintainer…
You mean like those of a well known desktop environment wrt nm?
/me puts the mirror down
Yours Martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 01:21:17AM +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> Why do noone comment on the point raised that the ham tool possibly can
> change the name of its binary without involving its end-users, whereas
> changing the name of the nodejs binary affects all end-users directly?
>
I co
[with apologies for the original broken reply]
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 01:21:17 +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
> forcing these two upstream communiti
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 01:21:17 +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
> forcing these two upstream communities into conflict.
I think we should for these c
On 11/16/2011 05:23 PM, Nick Leverton wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:48:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>>
>> There is no one way to deal with this, we should only deal with this
>> on a case-by-case basis and use a number of strategies. ...
>
>> encourage our upstreams to rename and or work
On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
> >
> >> Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
> >> projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
> >> sho
On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
>
>> Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
>> projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
>> shouldn't be viewed in terms of "look at what those meanies in
Le mercredi 16 novembre 2011 à 18:48 +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
> On the other side of a similar coin, the epiphany browser has way more
> users than the epiphany game, but it "lost".
Reality check: it is not a question of number of users, but a question
of which package has the most stubborn mai
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:48:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>
> There is no one way to deal with this, we should only deal with this
> on a case-by-case basis and use a number of strategies. ...
> encourage our upstreams to rename and or work it out between them. If
> they are willing, great,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Joey Hess wrote:
> chromium the browser conflicted with chromium the game and won
As the person who did the renaming of that in Debian and upstream; it
was a no-brainer, there was no winning or losing. The game was always
"Chromium B.S.U.", the sf.net project was
Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] sean finney
>
> | export PATH=/usr/lib/nodejs:$PATH
> |
> | and problem solved, right?
>
> PATH isn't considered for #! lines, so not really.
It is if you use #!/usr/bin/env node
--
John H. Robinson, IV jaq...@debian.org
]] sean finney
| export PATH=/usr/lib/nodejs:$PATH
|
| and problem solved, right?
PATH isn't considered for #! lines, so not really.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
w
Alex Pennace wrote:
> Clearly, the nodejs community would not be pleased. On the other hand,
> the AX25 community would not be pleased about being forced to rename
> if it fell on them. So the real question is which community should
> bear the costs of resolving this conflict?
>
> At this stage, i
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 13:34, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Two groups of users, one distro in the middle"):
> > I agree. One possiblity when packages A and B conflict for a program name
> > would be to rename, but in addition to provide a wrapper that
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 03:33:02PM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Furthermore, packages in Debian are - to the best of my knowledge -
> adapted already to use /usr/bin/nodejs, packages outside can still work
> unmodified, if the user makes a simple symlink. Document this, and all's
> well.
I don't t
Paul Wise writes:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
>
>> Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
>> projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
>> shouldn't be viewed in terms of "look at what those meanies in Debian
>> are making
Charles Plessy writes ("Re: Two groups of users, one distro in the middle"):
> I agree. One possiblity when packages A and B conflict for a program name
> would be to rename, but in addition to provide a wrapper that executes the
> program from A when only A is installed, fr
Le Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 08:48:57AM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
>
> > Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
> > projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
> > shouldn't be viewed in terms of "look
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
> Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
> projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
> shouldn't be viewed in terms of "look at what those meanies in Debian
> are making us do" but instead regarded
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 05:50:08PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Alex Pennace wrote:
>
> > According to [1], this isn't the first time the nodejs folks ran into
> > a name problem. Up until March of 2009 they were using the name
> > "server,"
>
> I suspect this was just a working title for the
Hi,
Alex Pennace wrote:
> According to [1], this isn't the first time the nodejs folks ran into
> a name problem. Up until March of 2009 they were using the name
> "server,"
I suspect this was just a working title for the program being
developed, in the half month before Ryan was able to come up
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 09:09:09PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> OoO En ce début d'après-midi nuageux du lundi 07 novembre 2011, vers
> 14:42, Ian Jackson disait :
>
> > 2a. Likewise the maintainer of "nodejs" should prepare a version
> > of the package where the "node" binary is cal
22 matches
Mail list logo
