[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#837467: libjs-handlebars, libjs-handlebars.runtime: should track its canonical source

[Pirate Praveen]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:46:10 +0200 Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
> Binary packages libjs-handlebars and libjs-handlebars.runtime are built
> from source package ruby-handlebars-assets which is the source only of
> the Ruby wrapper for Handlebars, not Handebars project itself.
> 
> Instead, these packages should be built from the canonical source at
> https://github.com/wycats/handlebars.js/ .

I have completed creating libjs-handlebars and libjs-handlebars.runtime
from its canonical source (using node-handlebars as source package name
as it is maintained as a node module). I'm creating a new binary package
handlebars as it provides /usr/bin/handlebars binary which can be used
independently (like how mocha, chai, grunt, gulp, webpack are named).

But waldi on #debian-ftp is insisting I merge the three binary packages
and make the name same as the source package, which I don't find reasonable.

1. There is already a clear precedent on naming packages when it
provides a useful command line program.
2. Mixing a nodejs program and javascript library in a single package
pulls in packages which are not necessary at all.
3. I'm open to combining libjs-handlebars and libjs-handlebars.runtime
into a single binary package.

I'd like to hear opinions on this from others, especially from
javascript packaging team members.

A transcript of the chat history is given below for reference.


Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
Llamby: thanks
please review node-handlebars, at least for last 2 years I'm working on
its build deps to move it to main
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=830978

#830978 - Browserified javascript and DFSG 2 - Debian Bug report logs
Debian Bug report logs - #830978 Browserified javascript and DFSG 2
Package: tech-ctte ; Maintainer for tech-ctte is Technical Committee
<debian-ctte at lists.debian.org> ; Reported by:
Z
zwiebelbot (IRC)
Debian#830978: Browserified javascript and DFSG 2 -
https://bugs.debian.org/830978

#830978 - Browserified javascript and DFSG 2 - Debian Bug report logs
Debian Bug report logs - #830978 Browserified javascript and DFSG 2
Package: tech-ctte ; Maintainer for tech-ctte is Technical Committee
<debian-ctte at lists.debian.org> ; Reported by:
W
waldi (IRC)
j4v4m4n: what i don't understand: why do you need a new binary package
and why do you need to rename the source?

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
the previous libjs-handlebars package is not built from source
it is easier to follow node-module_name as a standard
it helps when searching for existing packages
W
waldi (IRC)
but why do you need a new binary package (that even does not follow node-*)

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
ah this was created to satisfie source code requirement for
ruby-handlebars-assets
W
waldi (IRC)
and why do you need a new binary package for this? why can#t the
existing ones satisfy them? libjs-handlebars have zero dependencies, so
pulling in other stuff is no problem

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
this was done some time back, let me go through the git history and find
out the reasoning
W
waldi (IRC)
and there is a node-handlebars binary package already in this archive,
which you don't longer build
there are no reverse dependencies of this package. please merge all
three binary packages into one and make source and binary package the
same name

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
I found out the reasoning, it provides /usr/bin/handlebars
like mocha, chai, webpack, gulp, grunt etc
when a node module provides a command line program, we prefer to use the
binary name as package name without node- prefix and use node- prefix
only for libraries that just install to /usr/lib/nodejs
But I agree, the description needs to be updated to avoid confusion
expand
FZDG
FloodServ (IRC) left, zhsj (IRC) and 2 others joined

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
we will need at least two binary packages, I can merge libjs-handlebars
and libjs-handlebars.runtime, but handlebars binary cannot be merged
with libjs-handlebars, as one is targetting nodejs environment and the
other is targetting browsers.
W
waldi (IRC)
no, both target debian systems, as this are debian packages. and one
package can include multiple stuff

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
Wwaldi: it will pull in nodejs as a dependency
which is not required for a libjs- package
why would a webapp written in ruby or python need to install nodejs if
they want to just use handlebars?
W
waldi (IRC)
j4v4m4n: yes. neither does libjs-handlebars have any reverse dependencies

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
ruby-handlebars-assets
it currently does not declare this dependency because we were able to
build libjs-handlebars from source
so ruby-handlebars-assets embed libjs-handlebars
and we don't want ruby packages to embed javascript libraries
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=837466

#837466 - ruby-handlebars-assets: contains embedded code copy of
Javascript library Handlebars - Debian Bug report logs
Debian Bug report logs - #837466 ruby-handlebars-assets: contains
embedded code copy of Javascript library Handlebars Package:
src:ruby-handlebars-assets ; Maintainer for src:ruby-handlebars-assets
Z
zwiebelbot (IRC)
Debian#837466: ruby-handlebars-assets: contains embedded code copy of
Javascript library Handlebars - https://bugs.debian.org/837466

#837466 - ruby-handlebars-assets: contains embedded code copy of
Javascript library Handlebars - Debian Bug report logs
Debian Bug report logs - #837466 ruby-handlebars-assets: contains
embedded code copy of Javascript library Handlebars Package:
src:ruby-handlebars-assets ; Maintainer for src:ruby-handlebars-assets

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
I don't think it is reasonable to expect ruby-handlebars-assets to
install nodejs with it
W
waldi (IRC)
i do. as many things need certain dependencies just for a few things

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
do you think it reasonable to install gcc along with all shared
libraries built using it?
W
waldi (IRC)
they don't need gcc. this code does
just not always

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
no it does not
it is only required during build
W
waldi (IRC)
it does. otherwise there would be no dependency

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
the libraries and served by a webserver and run in a browser
there is no dependency currently, you are insisting on making it a
dependency
WW
waldi (IRC)
then drop the depency fromt he handlebars package, if it is not needed

Pirate 🏴‍☠️ Praveen
It is not required for libjs-handlebars or libjs-handlebars.runtime
both binary packages currently does not declare a dependency on nodejs
if you insist on it, lets take it to
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=837467 and get
opinions from other developers on what is reasonable here

#837467 - libjs-handlebars, libjs-handlebars.runtime: should track its
canonical source - Debian Bug report logs
Debian Bug report logs - #837467 libjs-handlebars,
libjs-handlebars.runtime: should track its canonical source Packages:
libjs-handlebars , libjs-handlebars.runtime ; Maintainer for
libjs-handlebars
ZZ
zwiebelbot (IRC)
22:45
Debian#837467: libjs-handlebars, libjs-handlebars.runtime: should track
its canonical source - https://bugs.debian.org/837467

#837467 - libjs-handlebars, libjs-handlebars.runtime: should track its
canonical source - Debian Bug report logs
Debian Bug report logs - #837467 libjs-handlebars,
libjs-handlebars.runtime: should track its canonical source Packages:
libjs-handlebars , libjs-handlebars.runtime ; Maintainer for
libjs-handlebars

https://matrix.to/#/!saEdMDOolDMHFHsdhS:matrix.org/$15147175312420ojnue:poddery.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 862 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/attachments/20171231/3bdeb6f1/attachment.sig>