Andreas Noteng <andreas@noteng.no> writes: ... > I have experimented a bit with using the old > (pre grunt) build system for jQuery, and it seems to be possible, but > to spend hours doing this kind of build system reinvetion for every > lib upstream uses seems a bit silly to me. Reading the threads about JSHint's license situation, it seems that it won't be too long before that is solved by obtaining a license via the Eclipse project that avoids the silly (and non-free) license on JSLint. In the mean time, would it be possible to produce a version of grunt that doesn't include JSHint? (that's probably a stupid idea, but I know nothing about this code, so I don't know). Anyway, to return to the original question, shipping objects that we cannot build should not be permitted. How can we provide security support on that minified JS? How can we provide any assurance that the minified JS matches the source? Also, if we were to permit this, it would remove pressure to fix the silly license situation. If it's only the minification that grunt is used for, how disastrous would it be to use the original JS for now? You could add something to the README explaining about grunt's current non-free status, which has resulted in the need to use the original JS for now. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature