On 08/12/2013 03:23 PM, Robert Marcano wrote:
This is a better explanation of why the use /usr/share/javascript: We
want to be compatible with others distribution that have the legacy idea
that JavaScript is a browser only thing, so in this directory we will
only store JavaScript that run on the browser
Sorry, I missed this:
"If a JavaScript library can be executed locally or consists purely of
JavaScript code, it must be installed into a subdirectory of %{_jsdir}."
and the Feature says:
"Additionally the following symlinks will be provided:
/usr/share/web-assets/javascript points to /usr/share/javascript"
So non browser JavaScript code will be shared via HTTP?, all those pages
are out of sync that it is difficult to understand what will go to each
place
>
>> "There are also some JavaScript libraries which are intended to be
>> used on
>> the local system, not served via a web server to a browser. These
>> libraries
>> clearly have all the standard reasons to avoid duplication."
>
> The preamble before this and the Install Location section afterward
> clearly states that there is JavaScript on the system that doesn't
> belong it /usr/share/javascript, like GNOME Shell Extensions and
> Node.js modules, which live in directories of their own,
This sounds like you think there aren't JavaScript libraries that aren't
tied to an specific runtime, there are
So, where do I put the code for a reusable, non web based, or runtime
dependent JavaScript library? like [1] or [2], these examples doesn't
have Node.js, GNOME Shell, nor GNOME JavaScript applications
dependencies, pure and simple JavaScript. I don't see it on the
"JavaScript Packaging Guidelines". If this is a general "JavaScript
Packaging Guidelines", it should standardize something for them, if it
is "JavaScript for browser Packaging Guidelines" it should be renamed
> but the rest
> of the guidelines still apply to them.
If everything else apply to them, I don't see why a Node.js application
or a GNOME Shell extension need to pull a package named web-assets, it
is a wrong name, plain and simple, and worse If they don't store
anything on /usr/share/javascript because they aren't browser code, why
pull them?
>
> I don't really need to repeat that in every paragraph, do I?
>
>> and later it contradict what you say, indicating that they must use
>>
>> "BuildRequires: web-assets-devel" and
>> "Requires: web-assets-filesystem"
>>
>> So, it means all JavaScript, even the used on the local system must
>> depend
>> of web-assets
>
> web-assets-filesystem contains a handful of directories and symlinks.
> It does not drag in Apache configuration.
> web-assets-devel defines a few RPM macros. It also does not drag in
> Apache configuration.
>
> web-assets-httpd contains the Apache configuration. js-foo libraries
> MUST not depend on it, since they could be used with any HTTP daemon.
>
> -T.C.
>
[1]
http://crypto.stanford.edu/sjcl/
[2]
http://code.google.com/p/crypto-js/