From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Subject: Re: GSoC NPM Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 18:23:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87oa46z2wb.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87shtiz8f7.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55051) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfrGG-00029u-AP for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 12:24:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bfrGC-0000Sm-2d for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2016 12:24:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: (David Thompson's message of "Fri, 2 Sep 2016 11:27:01 -0400") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: "Thompson, David" Cc: guix-devel Thompson, David writes: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrot= e: > >> Also, I found that you prefer going through the repository/github >> instead of using the dist tarball. Why is that? > > The tarballs distributed by NPM are considered binaries, not source. Ah I see. In some cases there are indeed some differences. So we'll probably want to reverse the default: if a repository is present it is most probably be better to get that. I only found significant differences with the fibers package, though. Others just differ in having an additional .gitignore and .npmignore file. I found in some cases that repositories do not have release tags. In such cases, it may be "better" to use the dist tarball, as you have a better chance of getting the exact released version commit? Greetings, Jan --=20 Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar=C2=AE http://AvatarAcademy.nl= =20=20