On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Andrew Kelley superjo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
If it makes sense to bundle multiple libraries in the same package which
other packages may depend on then go for it.
I understand. Here is an example
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Frederic Peters fpet...@debian.org wrote:
Steve McIntyre wrote:
I've seen ITPs for a massive set of tiny-looking node libraries go
past on -devel in the last few months, so I thought it was about time
I looked at one. I'm a bit worried by what I've seen,
On Aug 05, Andrew Kelley superjo...@gmail.com wrote:
What do you expect me to do? It would be very easy to just bundle all
node_modules with the package but that is against Debian guidelines. Each
dependency must track upstream. So that's exactly what we're doing and
we're getting flak for
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
If it makes sense to bundle multiple libraries in the same package which
other packages may depend on then go for it.
I understand. Here is an example of doing exactly this:
❦ 12 juillet 2014 23:08 +0100, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com :
And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that Frederick
pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as libraries instead of
being inlined wherever they're needed?
Because, in node, a library is cheap and the
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 09:26:38 +0200
Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:
❦ 12 juillet 2014 23:08 +0100, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com :
And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that
Frederick pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as
libraries instead of being
At Sun, 13 Jul 2014 09:26:38 +0200,
Vincent Bernat wrote:
❦ 12 juillet 2014 23:08 +0100, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com :
And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that Frederick
pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as libraries instead of
being inlined
❦ 13 juillet 2014 11:34 +0200, Jeroen Dekkers jer...@dekkers.ch :
And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that Frederick
pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as libraries instead of
being inlined wherever they're needed?
Because, in node, a library is cheap and
❦ 13 juillet 2014 08:50 +0100, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org :
And I've got to ask: for the couple of trivial examples that
Frederick pointed out - why on earth do these even exist as
libraries instead of being inlined wherever they're needed?
Because, in node, a library is cheap
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-ms
Version : 0.6.2
Upstream Author : Guillermo Rauch rau...@gmail.com
* URL : https://github.com/guille/ms.js
* License :
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-ms
Version : 0.6.2
Upstream Author : Guillermo Rauch rau...@gmail.com
* URL : https://github.com/guille/ms.js
*
On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-ms
Version : 0.6.2
Upstream Author : Guillermo Rauch
Steve McIntyre wrote:
I've seen ITPs for a massive set of tiny-looking node libraries go
past on -devel in the last few months, so I thought it was about time
I looked at one. I'm a bit worried by what I've seen, considering
typical discussions in the past about really small packages.
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
tack:~/debian/ms.js$ wc -l index.js
111 index.js
Am I missing something, or is the working code in this package really
just 111 lines? Why isn't this bundled up into
Le samedi 12 juillet 2014 à 12:03 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
tack:~/debian/ms.js$ wc -l index.js
111 index.js
Am I missing something, or is the working code
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name:
On 12 July 2014 15:15, Michael Banck mba...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
On 12 July 2014 12:35, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com writes:
Right. Did you discuss that with ftpmaster or anybody else outside of
the javascript team? There's typically been a consensus against very
small packages containing just a single script or piece of code so small
that the packaging metadata is going to
Frederic Peters fpet...@debian.org writes:
Indeed, I also recently looked at some, but didn't speak about it; just
like we have LaTeX packages including a serie of CTAN packages, I
believe it would make sense to have the same sort of thing for node.js
modules.
The CTAN case is a little bit
Hi,
Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-07-12 19:19:16)
I'd really like to see us solve this problem by figuring out a better
metadata distribution system (and IIRC some progress was made on that
front recently) than in making life more difficult for packagers.
which progress is that?
With
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 16:12:17 +0200
Leo Iannacone l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
Am I missing something, or is the working code in this package
really just 111 lines? Why isn't this bundled up into something
more reasonable in size for the packaging system?
No,
you're right. It is really
l...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 12 July 2014 15:15, Michael Banck mba...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0200, Leo Iannacone wrote:
But, after discussing this in JavaScript team we ended up that it is
better have separated packages, instead of having a big
nodejs-common (or
kapo...@melix.org wrote:
Le samedi 12 juillet 2014 à 12:03 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
Right. Did you discuss that with ftpmaster or anybody else outside of
the javascript team? There's typically been a consensus against very
small packages containing just a single script or piece of
23 matches
Mail list logo
