Re: node-tty-browserify_0.0.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 16:47:05 -0000
- From: Pirate Praveen <praveen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: node-tty-browserify_0.0.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Thorsten Alteholz <ftpmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am sorry, but I don't understand why you module makes sense.
> Please add a more detailed description to your debian/control.
This is seriously becoming too much. "This module is a dependency
for browserify." is already present in the description. And short
description says "tty module from node core for browsers".
We are not expecting anyone to install this module directly. You
can't apply the same standard of a full featured application to a
small module. The whole node eco system is different from what we
are used to before or after.
You can't ask to do two mutually exclusive things at the same
time. You have to either grant an exception to browserified
How do you expect we package browserify if you reject its
dependencies like tty-browserify?
I'm not super thrilled to package so many small dependencies, but
I'm forced to package them because ruby-handlebars-assets won't
be accepted without browserify. I'd happily stop packaging all
these small modules if you grant an exception for
> Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't
> understand why your files were rejected, or if you upload new
> files which address our concerns.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----