[Pkg-javascript-devel] chalk packaging

[Jérémy Lal]

The short answer: you're welcome to do as you think it's best and take care
of node-chalk packaging.
The long story:
When Andrew worked on node-chalk, some people on -devel were concerned
about the (opiniatedly high) number of small nodejs debian packages. We
started trying to make a bundle and took node-chalk as a good candidate for
doing so, without any convincing solution (i had something fun but not
really maintainable) - since debian is about packaging separate software in
separate packages, any other way is a bad way. After a while Andrew got
bored and worked around the need for node-chalk ;)

Jérémy.


2015-03-19 23:42 GMT+01:00 Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebastic at xs4all.nl>:

> Hi Andrew & Jérémy,
>
> I've found your packaging for node-chalk and most of its dependencies
> and their related ITPs (#753410, #753254, #753275, #753321, #753269).
>
> What was the reason to no longer intent to package these?
>
> Are the dependencies really that strict to requiring bundling the
> dependencies?
>
> I want to get these packages into the archive because node-chalk is
> required for node-nomnom, which in turn is required for closure-util &
> openlayers.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Bas
>
> --
>  GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
> Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/attachments/20150320/6f39d88b/attachment.html>