[Bug 1042665] Re: [FFe] Please sync mathjax 2.0.3-1 - 2.0.3-2 from Debian experimental (main)

2012-09-03 Thread Dmitry Shachnev
Well, it seems that after a quick fix to the packer script [1], there's no difference between our packed files and upstream ones. This means we could stick to the current version without any security risk. [1]: https://github.com/mitya57/MathJax-

[Bug 1042665] Re: [FFe] Please sync mathjax 2.0.3-1 - 2.0.3-2 from Debian experimental (main)

2012-08-31 Thread Dmitry Shachnev
There's test directory in the orig tarball (covering different use cases / configurations), all pages from there work with repacked MathJax. If something goes wrong, it would be a critical bug in yui-compressor. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs,

[Bug 1042665] Re: [FFe] Please sync mathjax 2.0.3-1 - 2.0.3-2 from Debian experimental (main)

2012-08-30 Thread Iain Lane
How confident are you that your scripts produce output which is functionally the same as provided by upstream? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1042665 Title: [FFe] Please sync mathjax

[Bug 1042665] Re: [FFe] Please sync mathjax 2.0.3-1 - 2.0.3-2 from Debian experimental (main)

2012-08-28 Thread Dmitry Shachnev
The main argument for repacking those files is making sure that there's nothing mailicious/harmful there. Also, this makes the package more compliant to the Debian policy. Anyway, let the Release Team decide whether it's possible to do this now. Are there chances of mis-packing the js files and