On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:39 AM Aleksandar Kostadinov <akostadi(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
Too bad, we're not talking about manual usage here but also
projects
likely have build scripts or something. Using aliases is IMO a no-go.
I see presently 2 other packages providing `yarn` executable:
> $ sudo dnf whatprovides /usr/bin/yarn
> [sudo] password for avalon:
> Last metadata expiration check: 1:37:54 ago on Mon May 21 10:56:24
2018.
> cmdtest-0.30-1.fc27.noarch : Black-box testing for Unix
command line
tools
> Repo : fedora
> Matched from:
> Filename : /usr/bin/yarn
>
> hadoop-yarn-2.7.3-6.fc27.noarch : Apache Hadoop YARN
> Repo : fedora
> Matched from:
> Filename : /usr/bin/yarn
IMO we should provide some alternatives mechanism so that `yarn` is
whatever the user wants. We can't ask upstream packages to change to
Fedora specific binary names. Or we can but we will be ignored.
If we don't handle `yarn` better, then users would likely just
install
`yarn` globally with `npm` and the distro package will not be used. Thus
the exercise to maintain it would be mostly worthless.
Take it up with the maintainers of nodejs-yarn, cmdtest, and hadoop-yarn.
I'd probably object to the usage of alternatives for this, since it makes
no sense in this case (all three /usr/bin/yarn binaries do different
things). If all three can be made to agree, then /usr/bin/yarn should
probably go to nodejs-yarn, due to its well-known usage.
But I disagree on it being "worthless". People are increasingly using yarn
data and preferring it over npm, so being able to support that in the
distribution is very useful.
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!