On Mar 11, 2012, at 18:36, Jeremy Lavergne wrote: >> Projects that recommend the use of "npm -g" for a global install should >> instead have an entire MacPorts port made for them. > > Why not have MacPorts interface directly with npm, and let it do the node > package managing? We shouldn't be in the business or adding portfiles for > other package manages when they work just fine being controlled by MacPorts. > Only if they have problems should MacPorts step in with its own portfiles.
But we are in the business of adding portfiles for software in other package managers. We already do exactly that for perl (cpan), php (pear, pecl), etc. We don't want other package managers installing software into the MacPorts prefix, but that's exactly what "npm -g" (and cpan and pear and pecl) would do. That's why the npm port already prints a message explaining to users that the use of "npm -g" is discouraged. We already have ports for some things you can install with "npm -g", like jake and coffee-script. We should continue adding ports for other such software until nobody feels a need to run "npm -g". _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
