Re: Intent to package: vcg
Craig Sanders <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> alternatively, the uglified files are GPL-ed, so it is permissable to
> de-uglify them :-)
> depending on how hairy they are, it might be no more than a few hours
> work with gnu indent and vi (s/vi/your preferred text editor/)
It's not as bad as it could be (one is going to need perl too, I
1] one would end up with code without comments (perhaps not very
serious; some people code mostly without comments themselves
which does not in itself make their source less free).
2] it seems that some amount of macro expansion has already been
done on the uglified sources.
3] all identifiers with file scope have been renamed to foobar187
or something like that. Would take some amount of reverse
engineering to make readable.
4] worst: one would be at a loss when a new upstream version appeared
which used other uglifying gimmicks. Effectively, de-uglifying
would amount to a project fork, so the maintainer would need to
be really determined to continue the maintenance without any