From greg at gregsheremeta.com Sat Aug 4 14:59:32 2018 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1967012078198364099==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Greg Sheremeta To: packaging at lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: [Fedora-packaging] Re: obsolete JavaScript packaging guidelines Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:52:18 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: CAJVv0OmE--hd9WT1acBFG_1WJczp_z+gM=j3onEisD457bZweQ@mail.gmail.com --===============1967012078198364099== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 10:43 AM T.C. Hollingsworth < tchollingsworth(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 1:33 AM Miro Hron=C4=8Dok = wrote: > > On 4.8.2018 01:17, Greg Sheremeta wrote: > > > This page > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:JavaScript > > > is terribly outdated. Even when it was created years ago, IMO the > advice > > > was questionable. Today, it's definitely bad advice. > > > > > > Modern web applications use webpack for JavaScript. With webpack, > > > JavaScript is minified and bundled, and sometimes assets are even > > > injected. I realize bundling libraries is bad for an old-school > > > RPM-based application. But no one packages JavaScript into RPMs (try = to > > > find react and friends), and the page is leading to confusion on my > team. > > > > > > To prevent confusion, acceptable options would be: either simply > > > deleting the page, or placing a giant "don't follow this outdated > > > advice" banner at the top. > > > > We don't generally do either of those. If the guidelines are outdated, > > they need to to be updated, not deleted. > > I'm not really active in Fedora anymore but as the original author of > the guidelines I wouldn't mind taking some time to get them updated to > reflect more modern JavaScript practices and the new bundling policy. > > Nonetheless, we still have lots of web application packages that use > direct