On 21/09/2010 14:48, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Carl Fürstenberg writes ("Re: Bug#597571: nodejs: non common executable
> name"):
>> Policy only states "The maintainers should report this to the
>> debian-devel mailing list and try to find a consensus about which
>> program will have to be renamed. If a consensus cannot be reached,
>> both programs must be renamed."; I don't see any consensus in the
>> thread you linked to, so technically both must change at the moment
>> :)
>
> I wrote that bit of the policy and my intent was to try to punish
> people for picking stupid names.
>
> Yes, both binaries should be renamed. "node" is a ridiculous name for
> a specific-purpose executable.
>
Wrong. nodejs still provides the binary nodejs and not _node_. So, nodejs can
stay as is. The rename would be necessary if both packages provide the
same binary (same filename), which is not the case here.
Please read again the bit of the policy you wrote.
Regards,
--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/
--
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/4c98b921.1080...@dogguy.org
