Quoting Emilien Klein (2014-05-05 10:09:19) > 2014-05-05 0:32 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]>: > > On 05/04/2014 05:31 PM, Emilien Klein wrote: > >> No other comments from the team on Jérémy's proposal? > > > > If the upstream tarball has both the original and minified javascript, I > > don't think we need to actively re-pack the upstream tarball to get rid > > of the minified javascript, any more than we need to actively re-pack > > upstream source that includes .png icon sources alongside their .svg source. > > > > We should not shipping the upstream-minified files in our .debs -- we > > should re-minify the canonical source and ship the output of that step, > > if we need to ship minified files. > > The current policy is to repackage the upstream tarball if it contains > a minified file, and regenerate the minified files as part of the > build process. > This has been debated in March (please see the first message on this > email thread for details).
> Although my original position is the same as what you outline, the > outcome of the discussion is that the current policy will not be > changed. I am thus currently pushing to get the policy formalized, by > explicitly referencing it on our policy page. What exactly do you mean by "formalized"? I believe Jérémy suggested improving the Debian-wide documentation for best practices - Developers Reference. Daniel is talking about Debian Policy. Seems you are talking about a policy for this team. I see no need for this team to have a policy more strict than Debian generally regarding tarball repackaging. - 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 [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
