Quoting Jérémy Lal (2014-04-30 21:09:41) > Le mercredi 30 avril 2014 à 14:34 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : >> Quoting Jérémy Lal (2014-04-30 12:53:22) >>> Le mercredi 30 avril 2014 à 12:35 +0200, Leo Iannacone a écrit : >>>> On 30 April 2014 02:10, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: >>>>> Status of packaging is that these libraries needs packaging first: >>>>> >>>>> node-source-map >>>>> node-uglify-to-browserify >>>> >>>> About node-uglify-to-browserify: >>>> You do not really need to package it, since it's only related to >>>> uglify2.x (it has no reverse-dependency) >>>> I think you can bundle it as a patch along with uglify v2.x. >> >> I am no fan of hiding upstream projects by maintaining as bundles in >> Debian. >> >> If in fact it makes best sense for node-uglify-to-browserify to be >> part of UglifyJS2 project, it makes more sense for me to have >> upstream merge those projects. >> >> Or did I perhaps misunderstand your suggestion? > > You understand correctly. I'm less strict about bundling... i'm using > that workaround rarely, though. > Anyway it doesn't matter here since in fact, uglify-to-browserify is > "A transform to make UglifyJS work in browserify". > I propose we postpone packaging of this module and list it in Suggests > for now.