Re: Node.js and it's future in debian
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
All,Although not currently running a node (although I do run aprs with kernel ax25), I started using kernel ax25 back around 1994 (ish) with a floppy that booted into ramdisk and provided two ports, one kiss and the other baycom. I used node back then but moved on. The disk still works but I can't for the life of me remember the logon password :-( Back then (kernel 2.0.29) it was ax25-utils-<version> that provided kernel ax25 apps and tools, in the days prior to ax25-apps and ax25-tools being released as separate packages.
When I last ran a node, along with a bbs, I didn't use the node package. Instead, I used fpac which provided the facilities I needed - ax25, rose and netrom. For many, many years, right up to just last week, I compile libax25, ax25-apps & ax25-tools from sources to try to keep as up to date as possible with fixes, etc. Although not a user of the packages I still appreciate the efforts of the maintainers who produce packages for the benefit of users/potential users who don't care to compile from sources.
As for a name change for node, it seems strange that such a long-running application should be forced to change simply because of some Johnny-come-lately. I think Debian policy in this regard should be reviewed to prevent repetition of the current stalemate in the years to come. FWIW, I've only ever used Debian or a Debian derivative.
Ray vk2tv On 04/05/12 14:09, David Ranch wrote:
Me again..AX.25 in Linux has been around for a long time so I can excuse it's overly generic "node" name purely based upon it's age but..The working title of Node.js was "server" for a few weeks, before anyone was using it.Wow.. that's horrible! Obviously we don't want stuff like that to happen. Please also consider that all this ISN'T just a *Debian* problem. Its a Linux distro-wide problem. It's groups like this that form and guide aspects of all Linux distributions consistency and considering Debian's wide influence, changes here will surely trickle into other distributions over time.It's also worth touching on that I personally appreciate the work thatPatrick Ouellette has done on maintaining the HAM packages for Debian. Like always, there are never enough appreciative people in this world but once removed / renamed /etc, I'm SURE a lot of people will come out of the woodwork to bitch about it. A *lot* of people use Debian and Debian-related distributions with Packet radio.1. Which package should use the name "node" in the long term? What can we do to ensure that happens eventually? (My answer is that I hope that neither uses the name "node" in the long term.)I personally think that some of it SHOULD be a first come, first served thing. I previously mentioned in the previous email that all of the various scripts that people run could/would break. Probably no big deal to many of us on *this* list but trust me, I know a few Linux packet people who would be seriously lost because of these changes.Also consider the tons of documentation, notably the AX.25 HOWTO that would be impacted and I highly doubt it would get updated (hasn't been since 2001) to reflect these changes. It's not like things have needed to change all that much - http://tldp.org/HOWTO/AX25-HOWTO/2. What should be the state in Debian's upcoming "wheezy" release to provide a smooth upgrade path and not surprise users too much?Is Node.js a new addition to Debian? Again, I side with first come first served.I also would hope that wheezy can include a /usr/sbin/node file that prints a message to help people notice they are still using it and calls /usr/sbin/axnode, but that is still under discussion. Likewise, the Node.js needs some migration to ensure scripts installed by Debian packages and from outside use the new name. I would hope that wheezy can include a /usr/bin/node synonym for compatibility until usage of it fades away, but that is still under discussion.)If for some reason Debian feels that longstanding packages and their well known binary names can be renamed at any given time (I seriously disagree with that mentality btw), I'd say then ALSO force the change of the "node" in Node.JS name to something more sane. Don't remove one poorly named file for a new poorly named one just because it's new and shiny.--David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html