Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690728
--- Comment #52 from James Laska <jlaska(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-11 08:34:30 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #51)
Ah, thank you James for that information.
Are javascript frameworks mentioned there somewhere?
You know, I was wondering that too. I don't see them explicitly mentioned, and
it's hard to determine where the line is between a collection of .js files
(libraries) and a framework. We can certainly raise this topic on packaging@
for clarification. Some initial poking I did gave me the same impression you
note later on ... that this is just the *current* policy, and it's subject to
change.
So then it sounds like the separate packaging I requested
is not strictly necessary? Anyway I glad that tinymce
was packaged up.
If Fedora later changes the bundling policy for website javascript,
I think it may be hard work to clean up...
Agreed! If js frameworks are okay to bundle for now, I think it would still be
wise to at least start package reviews for them ... but not require their
completion for this review? Thoughts/comments/concerns?
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.