On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 05/02/2013 01:40 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Stanislav Ochotnicky
> <sochotnicky(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> Quoting T.C. Hollingsworth (2013-04-27 00:03:21)
>>> Yeah, this seems like a good idea. I wonder if npm2rpm and
>>> stuff like that should live in this package, or in it's own?
>>
>> Advantage of having single project is that you won't have to
>> approve commit access several times :-) In Java we create single
>> source tarball, but then spec file splits this into several
>> smaller binary RPMs.
>
> True. We'd definitely want to split the binary RPMs if we did
> this because npm2rpm will be much more dep heavy (it needs npm
> itself as well as a templating library).
>
Please remember to consider the bootstrapping problem in the event of
future mass-rebuilds. If the nodejs package starts build-depending on
the npm package, that's a circular dependency that becomes very
difficult to maintain. (I've seen how they have to do it in GCC, and
it's not pretty).
I'm just talking about Requires: npm. We definitely wouldn't need
BuildRequires on it (the only way that would ever be possible is for
%check, but there's no network in koji so we couldn't use it for any
tests there anyway). So, this shouldn't be a problem?
I'd suggest that we might want to pull out the macro and npm2rpm
stuff
as a separate SRPM, mainly just to avoid this problem. So I'm all for
the 'nodejs-packaging' project to be all-encompassing here.
-T.C.