What belongs in bpkg?

[brock]

I'm looking for your feedback, and would welcome a dialog on what types of packages belong in bpkg. While I don't think a heavy-handed approach is ideal, some guidelines might be in order to help those coming in and to prevent "package spam".

Some thoughts:

• aliases probably don't belong in bpkg
• anything that you currently run from your ~/bin would probably be a good candidate
• bash functions that must be sourced and run in the current shell might be good candidates, but I'd want some level of scrutiny that those are being evaluated for security.

Here's an example of a function I source in my profile:

function mcd() {
    mkdir $1
    cd $1
}

And here's an example of a function I wouldn't want in my profile:

curl http://some-ad-site.com > /dev/null 2>&1

[brock]

Once there is some consensus, I'd propose we add it here: http://www.bpkg.io/guidelines/

[yorkie]

added the 2 following:

1. it should be a package, it shouldn't depend on any logics for business
2. it should depends on basic GUN/Linux softwares, in other words, be lightweight, it actually just like clibs to clang project

This is my thoughts, and wow, we in fact need to achieve the guidelines page :)

/cc @jwerle @alexdantas

[yorkie]

Btw, actually bpkg should detect if the name exists in /usr/bin, usr/local/bin and etc., then we would give a warning to users?

[jwerle]

+1 to all of this. I'd love to see a draft of a guidelines page too

[brock]

Another thing I noticed when creating node-reinstall is that I forgot to make the file executable, and bpkg didn't do this for me during the installation. Probably worth opening an issue on that, and providing it in the guide here.

[jwerle]

I'm not sure bpkg should be responsible for changing the permissions on a file. It is up to the creator of the package to explicitly modify the permissions or handle it in the "install" directive of the package.json file. See https://github.com/jwerle/assert.sh/commit/51d7a0ad7bf1042b07a86de81c90b042e5aa8873#diff-b9cfc7f2cdf78a7f4b91a753d10865a2R6

[brock]

I can see the reasoning behind that. We should probably add that to the package guidelines in that case.

The issue I ran into after I'd added node-reinstall to bpkg was that it was being installed globally into /usr/local/bin, and since I hadn't set it to +x, when I did which node-reinstall I got nothing back.

[yorkie]

@jwerle @brock How about just adding the bin field like NPM:

{
  "bin": {
    "doCMD": "cmd.sh"
  }
}

In this case we can do the modification on permission because the bpkg user specified it.

[brock]

@yorkie where would you add that?

[yorkie]

Should be package.json @brock :)

[yorkie]

Ouch! @brock I'm unsure if the current bpkg has implemented this feature, just propose to you guys, if lgty, i'm interested in doing introduce this.

[brock]

thanks @yorkie

ya I need to spend some more time to dig through the bpkg source because I'm not familiar enough with how all of it works. Can you expand a bit on what that would do? Sounds interesting...

[yorkie]

haha, i'm waiting for @jwerle, he is my commander 🎏

[jwerle]

Haha go for it. This will enable a lot of bash packages in npm to just work
with bpkg

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015, 10:57 PM Yorkie Liu [email protected] wrote:

haha, i'm waiting for @jwerle https://github.com/jwerle, they are my
commander [image: 🎏]

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#14 (comment).