On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

> Just looking at the package name that seems not an ideal aproach: Should 
> we then make packages for each combination of libraries to be merged 
> together, or am I missing a more clever logic?  Or do you perhaps point 

No, protoaculous is a special case: the combination of these
two already exists as upstream thing.

If a “web application” needs JS merged together, it should do
that itself.

Sorry for being unclear.

> I agree that too strong standardization is not good - and I disagree 
> with the interpretation that the Javascript team is moving towards such 
> standardization.
> 
> That said, I do believe Uglifyjs is the best compressor we have, and 
> recomend to treat it as a "default" similar to newest GCC for C - i.e. 
> use Uglifyjs unless all of...

Right. Thanks for the clarification, too.

bye,
//mirabilos
-- 
>> Why don't you use JavaScript? I also don't like enabling JavaScript in
> Because I use lynx as browser.
+1
        -- Octavio Alvarez, me and ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕ (Mario Lang) on debian-devel


_______________________________________________
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Reply via email to