Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 10:52:53 -0600 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Ruslan Makhmatkhanov <rm@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Rodrigo Osorio <ros@bebik.net>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: How should we name node-js ports ? Message-ID: <53BBD762-9A8B-4582-B65D-27D752B567BF@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <32cbf11f-5ce0-ce16-8c56-c45d585ed2f6@FreeBSD.org> References: <ba4cd1f6-2bd7-f710-2e6c-56c470c5ef7d@bebik.net> <32cbf11f-5ce0-ce16-8c56-c45d585ed2f6@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 15 May, 2017, at 6:57, Ruslan Makhmatkhanov <rm@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >=20 > Rodrigo Osorio wrote on 05/14/2017 15:16: >> Hi, >> I have a bunch of nodejs ports to add, most of them as dependencies, >> and I wonder if we can find a naming standard like adding 'node' or >> 'node-js' prefix in the name ; I personally prefer 'node'. >> As a result a port who install the node package xxx will be named = 'node-xxx' >> Does it sounds good to you ? >> Thanks for your time, >> -- rodrigo >=20 > Am I right they will be actually installed with npm? If so, it would = make sense to name them npm-<package>, like rubygems installed packages. npm packages can be installed by yarn as well; nodejs is really the = common name and makes a better prefix. That said, making node ports does not sit well with me. npm/yarn manages = node packages. Things will break if a user has those same packages = installed globally and tries to update or remove them, or if a user = needs specific global versions installed. Rodrigo, I think your better option is simply to bundle those = dependencies yourself, at the specific versions that your port requires, = and install them to a private location. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53BBD762-9A8B-4582-B65D-27D752B567BF>