On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 04:50:12PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Well, there are some limits even to what upstream can do. Whether Node.js
> has reached that point is debatable, but (to take an obvious example) even
> if upstream wanted to rename python to something else, it's never going to
> happ
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [120503 01:33]:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> > I'm disappointed to see this is still rumbling on. There is only one
> > correct solution, and it is this:
>
> >> In the long term, I would be happiest if both were renamed.
>
> I won't reiterate the arguments that I'
Ian Jackson writes:
> I really feel it's unfair to allow johnny-come-lately's who couldn't be
> bothered to choose a reasonable name for their program, and who couldn't
> be bothered even to look up whether the name was already taken, to just
> blunder their way into stealing names like this.
>
(culling cc list since there were noise complains from debian-hams@)
Russ Allbery wrote:
> It's interesting that Fedora has nodejs, and I think we should also
> provide nodejs and encourage people to use that name, but I think it would
> be best for our users to also provide node.
For the record,
Russ Allbery writes ("Bug#614907: tech-ctte: please help maintainers of
packages with a "node" command to have a reasonable conversation"):
> I also think the current Policy suggestion to rename both programs in the
> event of an unreconciled naming conflict is not a v
Ian Jackson writes:
> I'm disappointed to see this is still rumbling on. There is only one
> correct solution, and it is this:
>> In the long term, I would be happiest if both were renamed.
I won't reiterate the arguments that I've already made on debian-devel,
but will mention here for those
6 matches
Mail list logo
