[Pkg-javascript-devel] libjs-* vs. libnode-*

[Jérémy Lal]

On 13/10/2011 23:48, David Paleino wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:45:34 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just noticed that libnode-backbone-dirty depends on a mixture of 
>> libjs-* and libnode-* packages.  That is correct according to Debian 
>> Policy, but looks ugly.
>>
>> We discussed it briefly recently, where Jérémy felt that it was unusual 
>> for same package to support both libjs-* and libnode-* so less of an 
>> issue.
>>
>> Now that David has added a bunch additional packages there is perhaps 
>> material for looking at this issue again?
> 
> Given I hadn't found any policy about this, I went "by heart" about package
> naming.
> I called libnode-* those libraries I thought were node-specific, and libjs-*
> those which could be of general usage (example: libjs-backbone).
> 
> Still, I'm not satisfied by the approach I'm taking, and would prefer a more
> objective guideline :)

I think libjs-* should be reserved for "browser libs" uses.
In some cases, the choice is obvious, since the lib cannot run, or has no use,
inside a browser. Then it should be named libnode-*.
There are cases where it can run on both : i'm for building two binaries out of
one source.
Symlinks to the libjs-* from libnode-* may not be a good idea. It seems simpler
to just build two independent packages.

Jérémy.