Quoting Daniel Pocock (2013-10-11 14:30:46) > On 11/10/13 13:30, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> I still (as I believe I pointed out in one of the bugreports I filed >> that day when doing the backport) recommend using uglifyjs >> consistently. >> >> (upstream argued there was a big size gain using another minifier, >> but in actual test the difference was minimal, and uglifyjs is (also) >> well tested and means simpler dependencies, compared to Java-based >> tools. >> > > For some reason (I haven't checked exactly why) upstream uses > closure-compiler for their Grammar file and uglify for the rest of > their code > > While it wouldn't be hard, I'm not too keen to make further changes to > their build system unless it is essential - however, if you are > curious about this particular case, you could raise an issue in their > github project page and we can try to understand it
That's what I did: https://github.com/versatica/JsSIP/issues/158 As I read it, upstream eventually followed mu suggestion to use uglifyjs - just haven't materialized as a new upstream version yet, apparently. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
