On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 08:23:56AM -0700, Jorge Gallegos wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:46:36PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 07:52 +0200, Remi wrote: > > > >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. > > > > Ah, thanks. I missed that. Still, it seems bad to be duplicating some > > very popular js quite so much: > > > > Actually, it makes perfect sense. Different frameworks release versions with > different versions of jQuery or prototype. Trying to force all those packages > to play nice with a single system-wide library is hell. > > Just imagine the scenario where, say, rails wants to ship version 1.1.5 but > there's a security patch in Django that relies on 1.2.1 and they are not backwards > compatible. You could make the same argument for any library, and it would be just as wrong. Benefits from packaging Javascript once: - if there's a security problem, you just have to fix and update one package - no questions about "is the security problem fixed in <this random javascript file>"? - we can probably arrange it so that users of different web apps only download the javascript file once - no extra copies on disk Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
