Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Hi, In February, I wrote[1]: > Both LinuxNode (package "node") and node.js (package "nodejs") are > designed to be accessed through the command name "node". [...] > If there is any way I can help, please feel free to ask. No response from the "node" package maintainers. My offer still stands, but I am worried that this is not going to be fixed before the next release. So, what next? Should the node package be orphaned? Based on popcon, it seems to have a small but respectable and growing number of users. Maybe if the current status of the package were more obvious, someone would start working on it (well, one can hope). Yours, Jonathan [1] http://bugs.debian.org/614907 -- 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/2006072651.ga31...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Hi Pat, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > The binary on the ham radio side is not "LinuxNode" in package "node" it is > simply "node" in package "node" > > Since you are still concerned with this issue, and neither side has shown a > willingness to change, I would say the time has come for both packages to be > renamed. Just to be clear: both package names are fine --- it's the names of the binaries that cause trouble. Being a user of neither package, I'd actually prefer for the name of the javascript interpreter to stay "node" (sorry!). It is the difference between needing to change the configuration of one superserver and needing to change the shebang line and content of many scripts. However, if the only way to include both node and nodejs in wheezy is for the interpreter binary to be renamed, too, that's ok with me. There's currently a release-critical bug against nodejs about that. Should the binary on the ham radio side be called ax25-node, or LinuxNode, or something like that? Given a proposed name, I would be happy enough to assume I have your blessing and start sending patches to the node bug. :) > Pat (one of the unresponsive ham radio maintainers) Glad to hear from you, and thanks for your hard work keeping the amateur radio stack working. -- 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/2007032031.ga25...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 01:27:42AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Hi, > > In February, I wrote[1]: > > > Both LinuxNode (package "node") and node.js (package "nodejs") are > > designed to be accessed through the command name "node". > [...] > > If there is any way I can help, please feel free to ask. > > No response from the "node" package maintainers. My offer still > stands, but I am worried that this is not going to be fixed before the > next release. > > So, what next? Should the node package be orphaned? Based on popcon, > it seems to have a small but respectable and growing number of users. > Maybe if the current status of the package were more obvious, someone > would start working on it (well, one can hope). > Popcorn is not a definitive measure of a package's use or usefulness to a group of people. Not every machine runs popcorn. Debian maintainers, like all free software maintainers, work on what they choose to work on for their own reasons and in their own time frame. Please do not confuse a lack of updates with a lack of active maintainer(s). The upstream AX25 tools have not had much activity and for the most part do what they are designed to do. The binary on the ham radio side is not "LinuxNode" in package "node" it is simply "node" in package "node" Since you are still concerned with this issue, and neither side has shown a willingness to change, I would say the time has come for both packages to be renamed. Pat (one of the unresponsive ham radio maintainers) -- Patrick Ouellette p...@flying-gecko.net ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net Amateur Radio: NE4PO What kind of change have you been in the world today? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 09:20:31PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Hi Pat, > > Patrick Ouellette wrote: > > > The binary on the ham radio side is not "LinuxNode" in package "node" it is > > simply "node" in package "node" > > > > Since you are still concerned with this issue, and neither side has shown a > > willingness to change, I would say the time has come for both packages to > > be > > renamed. > > Just to be clear: both package names are fine --- it's the names of > the binaries that cause trouble. > > Being a user of neither package, I'd actually prefer for the name of > the javascript interpreter to stay "node" (sorry!). It is the > difference between needing to change the configuration of one > superserver and needing to change the shebang line and content of many > scripts. However, if the only way to include both node and nodejs in > wheezy is for the interpreter binary to be renamed, too, that's ok > with me. There's currently a release-critical bug against nodejs > about that. You claim to not use either package, but yet you advocate for the node.js package to keep the executable name "node" - this is strange to me. Having a vested interest in the ham radio package retaining the name "node" and pointing out the history of the ham radio package being in Debian long before the node.js package, I want the ham radio package to retain the name. Apparently a consensus has not been reached, or at least not one that you recognize. In the event of no consensus, Debian policy calls for *both* packages to have their binaries renamed. You even say as much in the bug report you filed against the node package. > > Should the binary on the ham radio side be called ax25-node, or > LinuxNode, or something like that? Given a proposed name, I would be > happy enough to assume I have your blessing and start sending patches > to the node bug. :) > When you assume something. (if you don't know the rest of the quote, google it) Are you a ham radio operator, or do you have another reason to be interested in the eventual name of the ham radio package? There is currently a bug against the ham radio package for the binary name conflict. This is sufficient pending the outcome of the "what package (if any) may retain the binary name node" discussions. When the ham radio maintainers decide on how to implement the fix, they will. If you wish to join the ham radio maintainers group, we can discuss that. Pat -- Patrick Ouellette p...@flying-gecko.net ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net Amateur Radio: NE4PO What kind of change have you been in the world today? -- 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/2007034509.gc16...@flying-gecko.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Patrick Ouellette wrote: > You claim to not use either package, but yet you advocate for the node.js > package to keep the executable name "node" - this is strange to me. Sorry, I must have been unclear. I was only explaining my preference. I wasn't lying. I also said: >> However, if the only way to include both node and nodejs in >> wheezy is for the interpreter binary to be renamed, too, that's ok >> with me. Indeed, renaming both is what policy (and good sense) requires in the absence of consensus. I guess it was foolish of me to imagine that there could be a discussion resulting in consensus based on something other than which tool is most important! (Both tools are obviously important in their communities.) [...] > Are you a ham radio operator, or do you have another reason to be interested > in the eventual name of the ham radio package? [...] > When the ham radio maintainers decide on how to implement the > fix, they will. No, I am not a ham radio operator. I was worried because this (release-critical) bug had received no response for three quarters of a year. I'm glad to hear you say "when" rather than "if" here --- as far as I can tell, you are saying that I should not be worried and this bug is not stalled after all. I am interested in Debian remaining useful for a variety of purposes, which is why I want to see some proposed fix enter unstable early enough to shake out problems so wheezy can both include fundamental tools for ham radio operators and for web developers. Sorry for the lack of clarity. Jonathan -- 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/2007053255.gc25...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
(+cc: nod...@packages.debian.org. Sorry for the noise.) Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Patrick Ouellette wrote: >> You claim to not use either package, but yet you advocate for the node.js >> package to keep the executable name "node" - this is strange to me. > > Sorry, I must have been unclear. A few more words of clarification: It might seems strange that someone using neither package cares about these bugs. So here is why I care: 1. I use Debian. I do not want it to be broken (one aspect of "broken" is the same command having different effects depending on which package is installed). My experience is that for better or worse, if the project can't fix a bug like this one, new maintainers of other packages in similar situations will take it as an example and introduce even more breakage. 2. Ham radio projects seem neat to me. Lots of nice people, including John Goerzen, are ham radio operators. It would be nice to make sure Debian continues to make their lives pleasant and makes my life pleasant if I ever acquire the appropriate hardware. 3. node.js seems neat to me. Lots of nice people including Jonas Smedegaard use it to program. I imagine that at some point in the future, even if I never start to use the language myself, I might find myself running programs using it (like has happened to me with ruby already). I hope you care some small amount about packages you don't currently use, too. :) -- 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/2007055326.gd25...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Jonathan Nieder writes ("Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?"):
> No response from the "node" package maintainers. My offer still
> stands, but I am worried that this is not going to be fixed before the
> next release.
>
> So, what next?
Our policy says that if consensus cannot be reached, both packages'
binaries should be renamed. That seems to be the case here. I agree
with the policy statement that both packages' binaries should be
renamed. (But then I would say that since I wrote the policy.)
However, we have a process difficulty, which I think may be part of
what is blocking these changes from being made. Normally a maintainer
would make such a change to their own package. However, if the
maintainer of package A uploads a rename of their binary to foo-A, the
maintainer of package B now has no more incentive to fix the problem.
A's maintainer leaves themselves open to the maintainer of B "winning"
through B's inaction.
Now I'm not accusing anyone of dishonesty or bad faith, but it's easy
to see how this is not an attractive proposition for A, particularly
given that in Debian we don't have any tradition of forcing people in
B's situation to act and our mechanisms for bypassing an inactive B
are cumbersome and slow (to say the least).
I think the best way to fix this is to prepare both renaming uploads
in advance, and allow either of the two contending maintainers to
upload both packages simultaneously.
So I would suggest that:
1a. The maintainer of "node" should prepare a new version of the
package where the "node" binary is called "ax25-node", and
containing whatever transitional arrrangements etc. they are
happy with. (It may be necessary for the maintainers to notify
each other of their proposed new version numbers, so that the
package dependencies can be correct.)
However, the "node" maintainer should not sign the package and
should not actually upload it. They should instead put it on a
public server (not mentors.debian.net, to avoid accidents!) and
send an email (signed with their Debian key) with the details
(including the checksum of the .changes) to the bug report and
the "nodejs" maintainer.
(1b. If the maintainer of "node" is not a DD or DM, and therefore
normally needs a sponsor for their own uploads, they should now
seek and obtain technical review from a sponsor. The sponsor
should, if satisfied, send an email to that effect signed with
their Debian key.)
1c. The maintainer of "nodejs" should download this package and
review the handling of the name change. If the "nodejs"
maintainer considers that this upload fixes the problem
according to policy they should say so.
Simultanously:
2a. Likewise the maintainer of "nodejs" should prepare a version
of the package where the "node" binary is called "nodejs".
(2b. Likewise any necessary sponsor review of "nodejs".)
2c. The maintainer of "node" should review this, as above.
After mutual approval of each package by both maintainers, ie after
each maintainer has said "yes" in step 1c/2c:
3. Either maintainer may upload _both_ packages. (In general this
would most conveniently be done by the maintainer who is the
later to give their approval.) The maintainer doing the
uploading should upload their own package first.
(3a. Alternatively, if either of the maintainers is not a DD,
the may request a sponsor to upload both packages. The sponsor
should confirm both approvals as above, and also confirm that
any necessary sponsor review by a DD took place earlier, but
need not undertake a technical review.)
4. If something goes wrong with this process, which results in only
one of the packages having its binary renamed in the archive,
both maintainers agree that the other maintainer may send an NMU
to fix this to DELAYED-7.
I include the stuff about sponsors, and failure recovery, in case it's
relevant, so that my proposal can be used as a template in future
cases.
Ian.
--
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/20151.57412.130027.129...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On 07/11/2011, at 2:20 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Should the binary on the ham radio side be called ax25-node, or > LinuxNode, or something like that? Given a proposed name, I would be > happy enough to assume I have your blessing and start sending patches > to the node bug. :) I have to pop my head up from my lurker-hole here, and say that I'm a more than a little confused, why a 15 year old application should change its name at all? Even the Node.js wiki makes it clear that the application should be called Node.js 'to disambiguate it from other nodes' - it sounds like the developers are being proactive in notifying users that they picked a name which conflicts with other packages? I don't know about others, but I'm not overly keen on the idea of reconfiguring machines which were installed last century, because a program which appeared in the last two years has the same name.. If you think about it, node.js is *much* more 'able' to change the name of its binary - it still has an actively developed community! - I don't know about other folk, but I find it pretty darned hard to find much 'current' documentation about a lot of the older x.25 & bbs stuff I have running on some of my older boxen - one of my BBS packages doesn't even appear in a google search anymore (god help me if the wrapper I setup in 2001 to make it telnet-accessible as well as dial-in, ever breaks ;) ) Although I'm curious why both packages can't just shove a Conflicts: in for each other, and be done with it? Or just leave it as is, since they're in different directories, provided a nice big must-click-ok dialog comes up during install/upgrade to notify the user of the change? From the AX.25 side, and probably at least partly from the Node.js side, the users are going to be fairly cluey, if not accomplished hackerers - having multiple binaries of the same name, in different directories in the path is nothing new (hell, we used to rely on it on some of our hosting servers - things like reboot, shutdown, etc were wrappered with scripts in higher-preferenced directories from the PATH, to make sure accidental reboots, shutdowns, rm's etc, couldn't happen, as explicit paths had to be used.. As for scripts etc, well, if you're not specifying the absolute path to any binary you're calling, you're just asking for trouble anyway! Cheers, DG Damien Gardner Jnr VK2TDG. Dip EE. GradIEAust rend...@rendrag.net - http://www.rendrag.net/ -- We rode on the winds of the rising storm, We ran to the sounds of thunder. We danced among the lightning bolts, and tore the world asunder
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 07:16:35AM +1100, Damien Gardner Jnr wrote: > > I have to pop my head up from my lurker-hole here, and say that I'm a more > than a little confused, why a 15 year old application should change its name > at all? Even the Node.js wiki makes it clear that the application should be > called Node.js 'to disambiguate it from other nodes' - it sounds like the > developers are being proactive in notifying users that they picked a name > which conflicts with other packages? > You would think there would be some weight given to the length of time a binary has been in the project, but there is not. First come, first served does not apply according to Debian Policy. > I don't know about others, but I'm not overly keen on the idea of > reconfiguring machines which were installed last century, because a program > which appeared in the last two years has the same name.. If you think about > it, node.js is *much* more 'able' to change the name of its binary - it still > has an actively developed community! - I don't know about other folk, but I > find it pretty darned hard to find much 'current' documentation about a lot > of the older x.25 & bbs stuff I have running on some of my older boxen - one > of my BBS packages doesn't even appear in a google search anymore (god help > me if the wrapper I setup in 2001 to make it telnet-accessible as well as > dial-in, ever breaks ;) ) I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual resolution of the issue. > > Although I'm curious why both packages can't just shove a Conflicts: in for > each other, and be done with it? Or just leave it as is, since they're in > different directories, provided a nice big must-click-ok dialog comes up > during install/upgrade to notify the user of the change? From the AX.25 > side, and probably at least partly from the Node.js side, the users are going > to be fairly cluey, if not accomplished hackerers - having multiple binaries > of the same name, in different directories in the path is nothing new (hell, > we used to rely on it on some of our hosting servers - things like reboot, > shutdown, etc were wrappered with scripts in higher-preferenced directories > from the PATH, to make sure accidental reboots, shutdowns, rm's etc, couldn't > happen, as explicit paths had to be used.. As for scripts etc, well, if > you're not specifying the absolute path to any binary you're calling, you're > just asking for trouble anyway! > The issue is one of following policy. Debian policy doesn't allow such a "resolution" to this issue. Consensus on which must change, or both must change are the only allowed outcomes. 73, Pat -- Patrick Ouellette p...@flying-gecko.net ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net Amateur Radio: NE4PO What kind of change have you been in the world today? -- 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/2008194814.gd30...@flying-gecko.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On 2011-11-08, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual > resolution of the issue. I don't know what's wrong with Jonathan Nieder's advise in [0] about helping users with the conversion automatically. That's how it's usually done. He even provided that patch. Who would refer to the node binary as provided by the ham package node except for the inetd and the ax25d superservers? (Serious question.) Because as we're providing a whole distribution we could adjust the latter's configuration file and ensure that both packages are upgraded (using Breaks, for instance). > The issue is one of following policy. Debian policy doesn't allow such a > "resolution" to this issue. Consensus on which must change, or both must > change are the only allowed outcomes. In this case the two packages at least don't ship the same file. With the current situation you can coinstall the packages and both parts ham and nodejs shebangs will keep working. But then policy talks of "filenames" and I don't know if that refers to files with a full path or not… If so, invoking policy as a reason wouldn't help here. Kind regards Philipp Kern [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=614907 -- 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/slrnjbken2.3js.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 08:33:38AM +, Philipp Kern wrote: > > On 2011-11-08, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > > I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual > > resolution of the issue. > > I don't know what's wrong with Jonathan Nieder's advise in [0] about helping > users with the conversion automatically. That's how it's usually done. > He even provided that patch. I don't know that his patch will or will not work. It needs to be tested by someone who uses the package(s) in question. He stated he uses neither the ham radio node nor nodejs. I note he provided a patch to the ham radio package, but not to the nodejs package. I also note the nodejs maintainers were working on a solution (last updated in February). http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=611698 > > Who would refer to the node binary as provided by the ham package node > except for the inetd and the ax25d superservers? (Serious question.) > I don't think the packagers are in a position to answer this for any particular installation. The end user can create any manner of linkage to any package's binaries. Certainly we can control what packages require specific binaries on a system, but we can not control the user. In this particular case, the postinst for node calls update-inetd to add an entry for node. And marks it as disabled. This is easy enough to change to a different binary name. > Because as we're providing a whole distribution we could adjust the latter's > configuration file and ensure that both packages are upgraded (using Breaks, > for instance). > > > The issue is one of following policy. Debian policy doesn't allow such a > > "resolution" to this issue. Consensus on which must change, or both must > > change are the only allowed outcomes. > > In this case the two packages at least don't ship the same file. With the > current situation you can coinstall the packages and both parts ham and > nodejs shebangs will keep working. > Provided the programs are being called with complete path names this is true. If the user is just calling "node" then it depends on the ordering of the search path. I'm pretty sure this is something most people want to avoid > But then policy talks of "filenames" and I don't know if that refers to files > with a full path or not… If so, invoking policy as a reason wouldn't help > here. > Jonathan invoked policy as a reason to change the names, then claimed he wanted node.js to retain the binary name node. You can't have it both ways in the absence of consensus. It appears not enough people in the project care about either package to reach a consensus. Earlier when this particular situation was being discussed, someone mentioned the generic name "node" was bad for a computer binary. 10-15 years ago it was a different landscape. The node.js folks should probably have given more thought to their binary's name given the nature of the computer software landscape at the time they created their program. I can see the logic in this argument, and so can support changing *both* binaries. I recall this situation earlier for the axlisten binary. Back when I was maintaining the ax25-* packages alone, someone complained that listen conflicted with their audio player (I think) with the same binary name. I argued for the ax25-* package and prevailed. A couple of years later after I was no longer maintaining the ax25-* packages someone complained again and the maintainer for the ax25-* packages decided to change the name to axlisten. Thanks for your questions and input! Pat -- Patrick Ouellette p...@flying-gecko.net ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net Amateur Radio: NE4PO What kind of change have you been in the world today? -- 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/2009151610.ga23...@flying-gecko.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Patrick Ouellette wrote: > Earlier when this particular situation was being discussed, someone mentioned > the generic name "node" was bad for a computer binary. 10-15 years ago it > was a different landscape. The node.js folks should probably have given > more thought to their binary's name given the nature of the computer software > landscape at the time they created their program. I can see the logic in > this argument, and so can support changing *both* binaries. I think this discussion illustrates why simple non-specific names are poor choices for both packages and for programs. Even 10-15 years ago "node" was already a fairly generic term. I don't think either package is completely free of guilt. Not changing the name now just pushes the problem further into the future for when there is another different conflict over that name later. Or simply pick one to grandfather in as having been there first. I think either are defensible decisions. It is unfortunate that even when names are relatively unusual and unique that conflicts sometimes appear anyway. Such as happened with "git". Is there a blacklist of names that have previously conflicted and so have been renamed? Otherwise, assuming a renaming happens, is there anything to prevent a new ITP some time in the future from stepping into the previously conflicted name? That would be a tragedy for both of the current packages. > I recall this situation earlier for the axlisten binary. Back when I was > maintaining the ax25-* packages alone, someone complained that listen > conflicted with their audio player (I think) with the same binary name. I > ... There are many poor names. Some like cut and paste have been around for so long and are so well known that they are not really a problem. But some are new and just seem like trouble such as "play", and apparently "listen" and also "open" also comes to mind. But neither would I want all programs to be named in such a unique fashion that I would have to type in "some-specific-name-to-some-program" either. The balance in the middle isn't trivial. Bob cul es 73 de kf0uw signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
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 called "nodejs". As Patrick said earlier in the thread that not enough members seem to care about this, I add my voice here: node from node.js is often used in shebang while node from AX25 is not. Having a "nodejs" binary will cause many difficulties to our users. What if the problem was raised ten years ago about Python for example. What an horrible mess it would be today if the python binary was called "python-py" or "python-script". See how communities may react to this. Ruby community does not like our packaging just because we enforce stability over freshness. What would think node.js community if we are using /usr/bin/nodejs instead of /usr/bin/node. Debian would be listed as a black sheep in every FAQ or tutorial and users will be invited to just install some non official package or use the source. Patrick seems OK for both binaries to be renamed. I don't see the rationale of not accepting that node.js keeps the "node" name. -- Vincent Bernat ☯ http://vincent.bernat.im Modularise. Use subroutines. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger) pgpC3OuFrB1Xe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Vincent Bernat (14/11/2011): > See how communities may react to this. Ruby community does not like our > packaging just because we enforce stability over freshness. What would > think node.js community if we are using /usr/bin/nodejs instead of > /usr/bin/node. Debian would be listed as a black sheep in every FAQ or > tutorial and users will be invited to just install some non official > package or use the source. Oh noesoneoneoneeleven Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Vincent Bernat (14/11/2011): >> See how communities may react to this. Ruby community does not like our >> packaging just because we enforce stability over freshness. What would >> think node.js community if we are using /usr/bin/nodejs instead of >> /usr/bin/node. Debian would be listed as a black sheep in every FAQ or >> tutorial and users will be invited to just install some non official >> package or use the source. > > Oh noesoneoneoneeleven Or to put it another way, one could kindly explain to such people that (1) the node.js packaging in unstable or experimental is reasonably up to date (if that is true --- I just don't know, but it presumably could be easily could be made to be so if someone wants to do that) (2) faced with a diverse userbase that was using the "node" command for two different purposes, Debian is doing the only thing it can do to make scripts reliable: rename both. As a nice side-effect, we get a simple, Google-able name for the tool. People unhappy with the divergence from upstream can do one of two things: (a) install a /usr/local/bin/node -> ../../bin/nodejs symlink locally, by running the following handy install-nodejs-symlink script (b) work with upstream to provide the interpreter under both names, so scripts can use "#!/usr/bin/env nodejs" to be self-documenting and work reliably everywhere (By the way, most of the description under (2) might apply to the ham radio tool, too. In other words, none of this seems particularly unique to interpreted languages.) -- 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/2014214013.ga3...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On 11-11-09 at 08:33am, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2011-11-08, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > > I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual > > resolution of the issue. > > I don't know what's wrong with Jonathan Nieder's advise in [0] about > helping users with the conversion automatically. That's how it's > usually done. > He even provided that patch. > > Who would refer to the node binary as provided by the ham package node > except for the inetd and the ax25d superservers? (Serious question.) Did anyone address above question already? Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Who would refer to the node binary as provided by the ham package node > > except for the inetd and the ax25d superservers? (Serious question.) > > Did anyone address above question already? One user claimed it would inconvenience users, but provided no supporting details about why a user would run it manually. http://lists.debian.org/debian-hams/2010/08/msg00032.html The package's own documentation states "Node is intended to be called from ax25d or inetd." A similar case with a large userbase is the syslog daemon. Debian used to ship standard with a /usr/sbin/syslogd. Then it was replaced with a /usr/sbin/rsyslog, from a different package. Since rsyslog is Priority important, it gets installed automatically, and this removes sysklogd; you can verify this happened to most users on [1]. However, we have not lost any sleep over users who might have something that ran /usr/sbin/syslogd directly, and I've never seen this inconvenience a single user. I don't know if there's any reason users would be more likely to run node manually than syslogd manually. Even if there is, the vast difference in userbases (multiple orders of magnitude) suggests it's unlikely to inconvenience many users. Probably this case is sufficiently edge that a NEWS file would do. -- see shy jo [1] http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=sysklogd+rsyslog&show_installed=on&want_legend=on&want_ticks=on&from_date=&to_date=&hlght_date=&date_fmt=%25Y-%25m&beenhere=1 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:04:36PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > One user claimed it would inconvenience users, but provided no supporting > details about why a user would run it manually. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-hams/2010/08/msg00032.html > The package's own documentation states "Node is intended to be called from > ax25d or inetd." > > A similar case with a large userbase is the syslog daemon. Debian used > to ship standard with a /usr/sbin/syslogd. Then it was replaced with a > /usr/sbin/rsyslog, from a different package. Since rsyslog is Priority > important, it gets installed automatically, and this removes sysklogd; > you can verify this happened to most users on [1]. However, we have > not lost any sleep over users who might have something that ran > /usr/sbin/syslogd directly, and I've never seen this inconvenience a > single user. > > I don't know if there's any reason users would be more likely to run > node manually than syslogd manually. Even if there is, the vast > difference in userbases (multiple orders of magnitude) suggests it's > unlikely to inconvenience many users. Probably this case is sufficiently > edge that a NEWS file would do. > The syslog case does not apply since the *standard* syslog was changed at the distribution level and another package *provides* the same functionality. Users could, if the old syslog package is still in the archive, install the old syslog as an alternative. nodejs *only* exists in unstable. A name change in unstable should be less disruptive because it is, well - unstable. Pat -- Patrick Ouellette p...@flying-gecko.net ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net Amateur Radio: NE4PO What kind of change have you been in the world today? -- 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/2016203827.ga29...@flying-gecko.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Patrick Ouellette wrote: > The syslog case does not apply since the *standard* syslog was changed > at the distribution level and another package *provides* the same > functionality. Users could, if the old syslog package is still in the > archive, install the old syslog as an alternative. Sure, or they could not notice the syslog change in the rest of the upgrade noise, and have anything that depended on the name break -- but nobody has complained about that happening. Either a) None or a very small number of users are affected by the name change of a daemon. b) Users are affected, but all have no problem with fixing their system. (By either changing it to use the new name, or installing a package, makes little difference.) c) All users are so careful during upgrades that anyone affected noticed the change and did not let it happen. If you think this is the case, I have a debian-user list to sell you. ;-) -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On 17/11/2011, at 7:04 AM, Joey Hess wrote: > A similar case with a large userbase is the syslog daemon. Debian used > to ship standard with a /usr/sbin/syslogd. Then it was replaced with a > /usr/sbin/rsyslog, from a different package. Since rsyslog is Priority > important, it gets installed automatically, and this removes sysklogd; > you can verify this happened to most users on [1]. However, we have > not lost any sleep over users who might have something that ran > /usr/sbin/syslogd directly, and I've never seen this inconvenience a > single user. Yep, and what an epic clusterf*** that is :( I have a number of clients who have a mix of debian lenny and squeeze, and ubuntu 8 and 10 LTS boxes - some newly installed, some upgraded, etc etc, and maintaining scripts to check whether a server is running sysklogd or rsyslog, while doing automated config pushes and syslog restarts for logfile archival, etc has been a fairly serious headache. --DG -- 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/19aa06ca-6b10-4538-bf61-6bf105677...@rendrag.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Ian Jackson wrote: > I think the best way to fix this is to prepare both renaming uploads > in advance, and allow either of the two contending maintainers to > upload both packages simultaneously. Thanks, that sounds sensible to me. Since this still seems to be stalled, I would like to hear from the nodejs maintainers whether this approach would be okay with them and whether there is anything others involved with Debian can do to help with the migration. (Yes, that includes helping talk with upstream to get nodejs accepted as a synonym so scripts with "#!/usr/bin/env nodejs" can work everywhere. Yes, that includes changing policy, if you happen to have a coherent proposal in mind.) Regards, Jonathan -- 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/2028231624.ge20...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
Jérémy Lal wrote: > I can prepare a patch for nodejs package. Thanks! [...] > - I can't help but talk about "npm", an essential development tool distributed > in latest nodejs (can be compared to ruby's gem). It allows one to install and > publish npm packages to a common registry. > It will need a patch to rename shebangs on-the-fly, and maybe rename them back > when publishing. Npm author is working closely with nodejs authors. Filed as bug#650345. [...] >> Yes, that includes changing policy, if you happen to have >> a coherent proposal in mind.) > > I don't understand, could you explain why / which policy ? Debian policy. I was thinking of [1] as I said this. But I do not personally have any idea about how policy could be improved in this area. Sincerely, Jonathan [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/11/msg00380.html -- 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/2029012236.gc28...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
On 29/11/2011 00:16, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Ian Jackson wrote: > >> I think the best way to fix this is to prepare both renaming uploads >> in advance, and allow either of the two contending maintainers to >> upload both packages simultaneously. > > Thanks, that sounds sensible to me. > > Since this still seems to be stalled, I would like to hear from the > nodejs maintainers whether this approach would be okay with them and > whether there is anything others involved with Debian can do to help > with the migration. I can prepare a patch for nodejs package. Those matters need help : - All packages shipping files with a node shebang must also be patched. Is there a simple way to search all packages having a node shebang ? - I can't help but talk about "npm", an essential development tool distributed in latest nodejs (can be compared to ruby's gem). It allows one to install and publish npm packages to a common registry. It will need a patch to rename shebangs on-the-fly, and maybe rename them back when publishing. Npm author is working closely with nodejs authors. > (Yes, that includes helping talk with upstream to get nodejs accepted > as a synonym so scripts with "#!/usr/bin/env nodejs" can work > everywhere. Convincing upstream will obviously need treasures of diplomacy, as it's easier for them to point their users to alternative debian packages. > Yes, that includes changing policy, if you happen to have > a coherent proposal in mind.) I don't understand, could you explain why / which policy ? Jérémy. -- 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/4ed425ff.6010...@edagames.com
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?
* Jérémy Lal , 2011-11-29, 01:23: Is there a simple way to search all packages having a node shebang ? http://lintian.debian.org/tags/unusual-interpreter.html (Unfortunately, the list might be incomplete because the lintian lab is still a bit broken; see bug #641468.) -- Jakub Wilk -- 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/2029010231.ga9...@jwilk.net
Resolve namce conflise with node and nodejs [was Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?]
Where is the voice of the nodejs maintainers in this? They are listed as: Debian Javascript Maintainers Jérémy Lal Dave Beckett Jonas Smedegaard -- Patrick Ouellette p...@flying-gecko.net ne4po (at) arrl (dot) net Amateur Radio: NE4PO What kind of change have you been in the world today? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Resolve namce conflise with node and nodejs [was Re: Is anyone maintaining (the ham radio tool) node?]
On 11-11-08 at 02:34pm, Patrick Ouellette wrote: > Where is the voice of the nodejs maintainers in this? For my own part, I am following the thread, quite happy to hear the voice of the (ham) node maintainers, but wondering what is so precious about keeping the name of its binary. Form my understanding it is a daemon, which (again from my limited understanding) means normally only sysV scripts should need to know the actual name of that binary, not all sorts of locally written scripts. As has already been pointed out (but not commented on, as far as I have noticed) the nodejs binary is an interpreter as thus normally used directly in all user scripts in their hash-bang. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
