[Pkg-javascript-devel] JavaScript policy clarifications?

[Jérémy Lal]

Le lundi 16 juin 2014 à 11:45 +0200, Daniel Pocock a écrit :
> 
> Looking at
> 
> https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Policy
> 
> there are some ambiguities in point 4 (*should* ship a /minified/
> version for each script, generated at build time (use /uglifyjs/ to this
> purpose) )
> 
> 
> - a package should /only/ ship a minified version of a script, or it
> should ship both minified and unminified or it is at the maintainers
> discretion?

I believe it is good practice to ship both: the unminified version being
mandatory, and the minified version optional.
Who's ok with stating this in the javascript "policy" (which is more of
a "packaging practice" than a policy) ?

> - naming convention for minified scripts - a script minified by the
> packaging process should have a .min.js extension?  Should all
> maintainers use the same extension for this purpose?  Should there be a
> symlink foo.js -> foo.min.js as in some packages?

The .min.js suffix is good to me - not sure it's a good idea to force
it, though.
The foo.js -> foo.min.js symlink should be present only in cases where
the minified file isn't built and the non-minified file is given instead
(but people expect some .min.js file anyway ? not sure of that).

> 
>    (maybe non-minified js files could go in a libjs-foo-dev package?)

Many websites have on-the-fly minification of assets, it'd be weird to
depend on -dev packages. But maybe it's not a bad idea after all ?

> - the reference to uglifyjs could also mention closure-compiler

Feel free to update the wiki !

Jérémy.