| 1 |
On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 12:30:25 -0400 |
| 2 |
Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> I recently found a need for the CoffeeScript compiler[0] that runs on |
| 5 |
> top of NodeJS. Its test suite requires a bunch of other javascript |
| 6 |
> packages, and I wound up packaging enough of them to test |
| 7 |
> CoffeeScript. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> In the process I wrote an eclass to handle packages hosted on the npm |
| 10 |
> registry[1] and install them globally. I put all of this in an overlay |
| 11 |
> for now: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> https://github.com/orlitzky/npm |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> We don't have any standalone javascript packages in the tree at the |
| 16 |
> moment but I know there's been some interest before. Is anyone still |
| 17 |
> (planning on) working on javascript stuff in-tree? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> If not, I'll probably commit dev-lang/coffee-script to the tree |
| 20 |
> without its test suite. But if so, the eclass and few dev-js packages |
| 21 |
> I have might be a good start. Then I could add coffee-script with its |
| 22 |
> test suite working. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> [0] http://coffeescript.org/ |
| 26 |
> [1] https://www.npmjs.com/ |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Is this what I prompted about a year or more ago, and drew no interest |
| 30 |
in pursuing the npm path? I cited an eclass called npm.eclass in a |
| 31 |
dev's overlay. The conclusion was that using npm to install anything |
| 32 |
competed with portage at a level that made it a 'no go'. This came |
| 33 |
from members of the portage 'team'. It is a very awkward topic. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
kind regards |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Ian Delaney |
Archives