Re: Minified javascripts in packages
Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> writes:
> ❦ 13 avril 2015 10:37 +0100, Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> :
>
> > I presume that we can agree that, if someone started offering a web
> > service compiling C code with output an order of magnitude better in
> > every dimension than gcc can achieve, we still wouldn't use it for
> > our binaries (at least not unless it were available as free software
> > that we could host ourselves). What makes JavaScript worthy of
> > special treatment?
>
> It is an interpreted language and "compiled" source can sometimes be
> considered as a pristine source too (for example, concatenation).
No, a concatenated bundle – the compiled form – is not the preferred
form for making modifications to the work. So it's not the source form.
When making modifications to the compiled work, the preferred form is
the un-bundled, un-minimised JavaScript. That's what needs to be the
source form for building Debian packages.
--
\ “If you don't know what your program is supposed to do, you'd |
`\ better not start writing it.” —Edsger W. Dijkstra |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Reply to: