On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Matej Cepl<mcepl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Kevin Kofler, Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:08:11 +0200: >> I'm not familiar with the JavaScript story, but if he really recommended >> against using it, there was certainly a valid reason. > > His point was that thousands of line of hardly obfuscated Javascript > (think Google Docs) is hard to recognize from binary-only distribution, > which I can see as pretty good argument. And yes I know that this > obfuscation is not for malicious reasons (it's compression as well), but > still, it would be lovely if source for Google Docs was available > somewhere. Well as the code has a non free license anyway its better that it is obfuscated. So a developer cannot read and get "infected" by it. Write his own code and copy parts of the code which he is not allowed to copy. Sure getting Google to release it under a free license would be a good thing, but I doubt that will do it anytime soon :(. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
