Re: Minified files and source code requirement
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Zygmunt Krynicki
<zygmunt.krynicki@canonical.com> wrote:
> W dniu 27.10.2011 11:22, Pau Garcia i Quiles pisze:
>
>> I said this in the original thread and I'll repeat it here: if we have
>> the non-minified JavaScript, then I see no problem in providing only
>> the minified version in the binary package.
>
> I'd like to twist this to a different viewpoint. For me as a developer
> having -dev packages with non-minified version would be an awesome
> improvement. Assuming I'm already using the lijs* packages for my work I
> could simply install the -dev packages and flip a switch to use non-minified
> versions and debug my application better.
Mmmm interesting, I had not thought about -dev packages. I was talking
about runtime packages all the time.
The main "problem" I see is for many JavaScript libraries the minified
version has a different name (jsquery.min.js vs jquery.js). This would
be easily solvable by using symlinks in most cases, although it is
additional work for the package maintainer. (in the case of witty, it
is not solvable: a C++ file is generated from the JavaScript source
when building, and there is no .js file to replace on runtime).
--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
Reply to: