Mail archive
alpine-aports

(unknown charset) Re: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] testing/nodejs-stable: new aport

From: (unknown charset) Jose-Luis Rivas <ghostbar_at_riseup.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 02:21:38 -0400

On 11/04/16, 03:32pm, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:24:46 -0500
> Jose-Luis Rivas <ghostbar_at_riseup.net> wrote:
>
> > On 09/03/16, 04:52pm, S?ren Tempel wrote:
> > > On 29.02.16, Jose-Luis Rivas wrote:
> > > > We have the LTS release on main/nodejs and the new features are being
> > > > added to the stable release which is at v5.7.0 (vs v4.3.1 for LTS).
> > > >
> > > > There's a replace against nodejs so there's no conflicts when someone
> > > > tries to install them together.
> > >
> > > Do we really want to maintain two different versions of nodejs?
> > > Personally I don't think that it is a good idea to maintain both the
> > > newest and the LTS version of a software in the official repositories.
> > > The only package that I know of where we do this currently is firefox
> > > and I don't think that it has worked very well in the past with firefox.
> > >
> >
> > They do differ quite a lot and most production units are using
> > nodejs-lts (the one we have already as plain nodejs) yet the newer
> > features are being added to nodejs-stable. While some things may fail on
> > nodejs-stable everything will work on nodejs-lts.
> >
> > That's the reason why I see having the two versions of it would be
> > useful. nodejs-stable is not necessarily the newest, since lts keeps
> > getting updates, but not new features. (Yet, newer releases tend to be
> > synced between both versions)
> >
>
> I think I am ok with maintaining both. I wonder if we want call them
> 'nodejs' and 'nodejs-stable' though. If i would see those variants I
> would believe that nodejs-stable would be the mode suitable for
> production, while in this case the lts is what you'd want for that.
>
> Maybe we all them nodejs4 and nodejs5?
>
> Other ideas?

My reasoning for the name proposal: nodejs-stable moves way faster, and
they use that name. There it may happen that nodejs v5.x.x could move to
v6.x.x and still be the stable branch without v5.x.x moving to -lts.

I do actually maintain these packages on my private repos and I did name
them nodejs-lts and nodejs (this one meaning the stable channel) but I
don't know if that would be a good idea. (Maybe it is and I have the
wrong vision about this).

My 2 cents.
-- 
⨳ PGP 0x13EC43EEB9AC8C43 ⨳ https://ghostbar.co




---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-aports+unsubscribe_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-aports+help_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Received on Mon Apr 11 2016 - 02:21:38 GMT