FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-15-2011, 04:29 PM
Tollef Fog Heen
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

]] sean finney

| export PATH=/usr/lib/nodejs:$PATH
|
| and problem solved, right?

PATH isn't considered for #! lines, so not really.

--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87bosdnvjh.fsf@qurzaw.varnish-software.com">http://lists.debian.org/87bosdnvjh.fsf@qurzaw.varnish-software.com
 
Old 11-15-2011, 05:23 PM
"John H. Robinson, IV"
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] sean finney
>
> | export PATH=/usr/lib/nodejs:$PATH
> |
> | and problem solved, right?
>
> PATH isn't considered for #! lines, so not really.

It is if you use #!/usr/bin/env node

--
John H. Robinson, IV jaqque@debian.org
http ((((
WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above, sbih.org ( )(:[
as apparently my cats have learned how to type. spiders.html ((((


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111115182353.GA7988@a.mx.sbih.org">http://lists.debian.org/20111115182353.GA7988@a.mx.sbih.org
 
Old 11-16-2011, 09:48 AM
Paul Wise
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Joey Hess wrote:

> chromium the browser conflicted with chromium the game and won

As the person who did the renaming of that in Debian and upstream; it
was a no-brainer, there was no winning or losing. The game was always
"Chromium B.S.U.", the sf.net project was chromium-bsu and it was just
a bug that the upstream tarball wasn't named chromium-bsu.

On the other side of a similar coin, the epiphany browser has way more
users than the epiphany game, but it "lost".

There is no one way to deal with this, we should only deal with this
on a case-by-case basis and use a number of strategies. Complain
*before* overly generically named projects enter Debian. Name our
source packages the same as our binary packages and use prefixes (like
firmware-, fonts-, printer-driver-, r-cran-, python-) on our binary
packages to reduce the chance of conflicts. In the event of conflicts
encourage our upstreams to rename and or work it out between them. If
they are willing, great, if not, add Conflicts to the Debian packages
and be done with it. Forcing the creation of a pair of
incompatibilities between Debian and upstreams doesn't help anyone.

I definitely agree with your point that the costs are Debian's only,
the upstreams will continue to not care or just deride Debian or our
users whenever they come complaining to them with a problem that we
created.

--
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAKTje6HRXQNo3g4CpDbSuQnKOqwcYfY6CxCgTQtMziMzr9GHr Q@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6HRXQNo3g4CpDbSuQnKOqwcYfY6CxCgTQtMziMzr9GHr Q@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 11-16-2011, 03:23 PM
Nick Leverton
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:48:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>
> There is no one way to deal with this, we should only deal with this
> on a case-by-case basis and use a number of strategies. ...
....
> encourage our upstreams to rename and or work it out between them. If
> they are willing, great, if not, add Conflicts to the Debian packages
> and be done with it. Forcing the creation of a pair of
> incompatibilities between Debian and upstreams doesn't help anyone.

+1

Nick


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111116162308.GA1217@leverton.org">http://lists.debian.org/20111116162308.GA1217@leverton.org
 
Old 11-16-2011, 04:22 PM
Josselin Mouette
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

Le mercredi 16 novembre 2011 Ã* 18:48 +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
> On the other side of a similar coin, the epiphany browser has way more
> users than the epiphany game, but it "lost".

Reality check: it is not a question of number of users, but a question
of which package has the most stubborn maintainer…

--
.'`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
`-
 
Old 11-16-2011, 05:08 PM
Bernd Zeimetz
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
>
>> Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
>> projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
>> shouldn't be viewed in terms of "look at what those meanies in Debian
>> are making us do" but instead regarded as a natural outcome of the
>> choices each project made at various times.
>
> I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of forcing
> these two upstream communities into conflict.

I think we should for these cases where it is obvious that one software
exists for a much longer time than the other. We should not force old
projects to rename themselves just because the developers of a new
project did not investigate if they use an existing name. Checking
filenames of the largest distributions is not hard.


--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4EC3FC3A.5040909@bzed.de">http://lists.debian.org/4EC3FC3A.5040909@bzed.de
 
Old 11-16-2011, 05:21 PM
Jonas Smedegaard
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Alex Pennace wrote:
> >
> >> Even without that point, the conclusion remains the same: Both
> >> projects should endure the rename (unless one concedes), and that
> >> shouldn't be viewed in terms of "look at what those meanies in
> >> Debian are making us do" but instead regarded as a natural outcome
> >> of the choices each project made at various times.
> >
> > I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
> > forcing these two upstream communities into conflict.
>
> I think we should for these cases where it is obvious that one
> software exists for a much longer time than the other. We should not
> force old projects to rename themselves just because the developers of
> a new project did not investigate if they use an existing name.
> Checking filenames of the largest distributions is not hard.

Who says the package maintainers of nodejs did not investigate the use
of an existing name?

Why do noone comment on the point raised that the ham tool possibly can
change the name of its binary without involving its end-users, whereas
changing the name of the nodejs binary affects all end-users directly?


- Jonas

--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
 
Old 11-16-2011, 05:48 PM
Luk Claes
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

On 11/16/2011 05:23 PM, Nick Leverton wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:48:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>>
>> There is no one way to deal with this, we should only deal with this
>> on a case-by-case basis and use a number of strategies. ...
> ....
>> encourage our upstreams to rename and or work it out between them. If
>> they are willing, great, if not, add Conflicts to the Debian packages
>> and be done with it. Forcing the creation of a pair of
>> incompatibilities between Debian and upstreams doesn't help anyone.

It does help the users who use both packages which is the reason why
conflicts should *NOT* be used unless both packages provide the same
functionality.

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4EC4057C.80802@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/4EC4057C.80802@debian.org
 
Old 11-16-2011, 06:03 PM
"Adam D. Barratt"
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 01:21:17 +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:

On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
> forcing these two upstream communities into conflict.

I think we should for these cases where it is obvious that one
software exists for a much longer time than the other. We should not
force old projects to rename themselves just because the developers
of

a new project did not investigate if they use an existing name.
Checking filenames of the largest distributions is not hard.


Who says the package maintainers of nodejs did not investigate the
use

of an existing name?




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: ad633eee28722ecf5e46ac738ea87999@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org">http://lists.debian.org/ad633eee28722ecf5e46ac738ea87999@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
 
Old 11-16-2011, 06:04 PM
"Adam D. Barratt"
 
Default Two groups of users, one distro in the middle

[with apologies for the original broken reply]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 01:21:17 +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:

On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
> forcing these two upstream communities into conflict.

I think we should for these cases where it is obvious that one
software exists for a much longer time than the other. We should not
force old projects to rename themselves just because the developers
of

a new project did not investigate if they use an existing name.
Checking filenames of the largest distributions is not hard.


Who says the package maintainers of nodejs did not investigate the
use

of an existing name?


I assumed Bernd meant upstream could have checked.

Regards,

Adam


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: b2da8790f848e688d050cd018cf2e457@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org">http://lists.debian.org/b2da8790f848e688d050cd018cf2e457@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:20 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org