>From : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_libraries "At this time JavaScript intended to be served to a web browser is specifically exempted from this but this will likely change in the future." This explain why so much .js libraries are bundled in so much wedapps. Remi. ----- Mail original ----- > Speaking about prototype and scriptaculous, I am sure that they are > bundled also in Rails and if there are some Rails applications > packaged, > they will be included also in them. However I am not sure if they > should > be packaged separately or just copylibs. > > Vit > > > > Dne 31.8.2011 06:35, Adam Williamson napsal(a): > > Hey, all. So, I'm looking at packaging tt-rss - an RSS reader > > implemented as a PHP webapp - for Fedora, since I run it on my own > > server. It became rapidly clear that it's a landmine of bundled PHP > > libraries and snippets and uncertain licensing. I'm unsure which of > > the > > things it bundles would be likely to qualify as copylibs, and also > > a few > > of the things it bundles seem to raise wider questions, so I > > thought I'd > > post my 'deps list' here and raise some of the issues: > > > > * dojo/dijit - F/OSS, packaged > > > > * simplepie - F/OSS, packaged > > > > * CheckBoxTree.js - requires formal license, unpackaged - > > http://www.thejekels.com/blog/dojo/dijit-tree-with-multi-state-checkboxes/comment-page-1/#comment-46 > > . not entirely sure whether this would count as a copylib. > > > > * htmlpurifier - F/OSS, unpackaged but its PEAR channel is packaged > > as > > php-channel-htmlpurifier, review at > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542045 > > > > * iui - F/OSS, unpackaged - https://code.google.com/p/iui/ > > > > * MiniTemplator - F/OSS, unpackaged - > > http://www.source-code.biz/MiniTemplator/ > > > > * phpmailer - F/OSS, packaged > > > > * position.js - comprises > > http://codesnippets.joyent.com/posts/show/835 > > and http://codesnippets.joyent.com/posts/show/836 - unlicensed, > > author > > contacted - these are probably copylibs? > > > > * prototypejs - F/OSS, unpackaged, already embedded in many other > > packages - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523277 > > > > * php-pubsubhubbub - F/OSS, unpackaged: > > https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub/ (was > > https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub-php/ , merged into upstream) > > > > * scriptaculous - F/OSS, mostly unpackaged, but part of > > http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Scriptaculous , which is a python > > wrapper > > with old versions of scriptaculous and prototype embedded in it > > > > * sphinxapi.php - F/OSS, packaged (sphinx-php) > > > > * tmhoauth - F/OSS, unpackaged - > > https://github.com/themattharris/tmhOAuth > > > > * xsl_mop-up.js - public domain, unpackaged - > > http://www.fadshop.net/xsl_mop-up.js but link is dead, ref > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98168 . probably a > > copylib > > > > So the major issues that come up: prototypejs seems to be embedded > > into > > an awful lot of Fedora packages, if you look at > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523277 as a reference. > > mediatomb has a copy, wordpress has a copy, python-webhelpers has a > > copy > > (actually it seems it's not there any more), python-Scriptaculous > > has a > > copy, asterisk has a copy. Isn't this a major issue? Should I file > > a bug > > for this and try to split prototypejs out into a single package > > which > > all those other packages could depend on, or am I missing > > something? Has > > it been declared a copylib? wordpress review request does not > > appear to > > have dealt with it, stating "* no shared libraries are present: > > okay" - > > I don't know if it was missed, or wasn't present in wordpress at > > the > > time of review. mediatomb review similarly didn't catch it. > > > > python-Scriptaculous seems to be a python (TurboGears) wrapper for > > scriptaculous, and it has scriptaculous and prototypejs embedded in > > it. > > the review request doesn't seem to have dealt with this at all, it > > simply states "+ no headers or static libraries.", which seems to > > be, > > well, a bit of a porky. =) > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508510 . should I raise > > this > > as a bug, or again, am I missing something? > > > > If anyone clueful has thoughts on the prototypejs and > > python-scriptaculous issues, or on which of the tt-rss deps are > > likely > > copylibs and don't need to be packaged separately, that'd be really > > helpful. thanks! > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
