Re: Minified files and source code requirement
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Roland Mas <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Requiring the non-minified file to be provided in the same source
>> package is not a very productive use of our time.
> Right. In the same way that providing the source for our binaries
> isn't very productive, I guess, because who's going to use it when they
> have the pre-built binaries? I know this is an exaggeration, but
> there's no substantial difference between the two cases.
But we provide *source packages*. We do not provide the source in the
That's what Raphael is talking about: having the minified and the
be the binary package, and also the source package).
I said this in the original thread and I'll repeat it here: if we have
the minified version in the binary package.
To me, these are equivalents:
And that's not entirely true, btw, because it depends on what minifier
has been applied. IIRC JSMIN and Packer do not modify the source
re-applying whitespace, indendation, etc), while yui-compressor and
Google's do modify the source to remove dead branches, optimize, etc
have multiple versions of binary libraries with soversions, different
package names (libfoo1, libfoo2, etc). We would have libjs-jquery1.4,
then we do not have a problem. This never happens, AFAIK.
it. This is what I do in witty, for instance.
Pau Garcia i Quiles
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)