Sorry, left the list out when I sent this before. Here it is for everyone, with updates... On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:59 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth <tchollingsworth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Sorry, I kind of dropped the ball on this. :-( > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I've been looking at more webapp unbundling stuff over the last couple >> of days (as anyone following my G+ feed probably noticed...) and I just >> noticed that web-assets-httpd is still not being built. The last note >> was back in August: >> >> * Fri Aug 16 2013 T.C. Hollingsworth <tchollingsworth@xxxxxxxxx> - 4-1 >> - temporarily disable httpd stuff while we're waiting on sorting out the >> directory >> >> that leads me back to a devel@ thread from around that time which in >> turn links to a discussion where we were hoping to come up with >> something compatible with Debian: >> >> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/2013-August/005888.html >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=553173 >> >> but both that thread and that bug report seem to have petered out, with >> no movement. >> >> Is there discussion going on about this in some other forum, still? Or >> is it sort of in limbo? > > Yeah that went nowhere really fast. For those not willing to sift > through the old threads , the responses from the Debian folks were: > > * One suggestion to use http://localhost/usr/share/javascript/ > instead. (Umm, no.) > > * Insistence that we sit around and wait until the FHS is updated. > (Can I get a special badge for submitting a feature for Fedora 40?) > > * Another individual thought that all web authors are stupid for > wanting to use fancy fonts and that I am wasting my time. (He might > be right about that last bit... :-P) > > * A suggestion to use the term "libraries" instead of "assets" (This > came up on devel also, but I'm really not a fan of calling random > JS/CSS/icon spaghetti "libraries". I think it's more confusing than > it is helpful, but if everyone's really in love with it, whatever.) > > * A desire to dot-prefix the directory (e.g. > http://localhost/.sysassets instead of / _sysassets) it might get > implemented as a symlink with some http daemons. (I'm cool with > this.) > >> I have unbundling of Roundcube's tiny_mce via an alias >> to /usr/share/javascript/tiny_mce working fine, but it requires the >> httpd .conf snippet that allows access to /usr/share/javascript , which >> is part of web-assets-httpd... > > Yeah that's blocking a few things. I need to drop into the FPC > meeting tommorrow to ask about nodejs stuff anyway so I'll ask if > they're okay with just proceeding with the directory dot-prefixed > instead or if I need to go through the whole song-and-dance first. > (I'm kind of itchy about implementing something different from the > approved guidelines even though it's just a period...) Thursday went like the rest of my week and I didn't get a chance to pop in to the FPC meeting. :-( I'm going to just go ahead and file a ticket for a guidelines update, there are a couple of other issues that have come up since they were passed that need to be fixed anyway. I'm double-checking all the past discussions for issues that cropped up for things to fix, if there are others that you want addressed please speak up now. :-) >> On another track, the web assets change seems to suggest the use of >> symlinks for unbundling things as a strategy to avoid divergence from >> upstream in cases where they aren't being nice and providing a proper >> variable for the path name that we can change or whatever, but I think >> any attempt to use symlinks to unbundle things that have previously been >> bundled is going to run head-on into the 'rpm can't convert directories >> to symlinks' problem. >> >> symlinks might be a better approach than Aliases, now I come to think of >> it, since it's all well and good shipping httpd config files but it >> doesn't help anyone using another web server...but I can't really use a >> symlink approach without a good solution to the directory-to-symlink >> problem, which we still don't seem to have. > > Grr, I guess I'll look back over that thread and write up a packaging > draft for that because we badly need it. So I came up with this: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/Symlink_Workarounds Suggestions welcome, and please feel free to just edit obvious stuff directly in the wiki. :-) FPC ticket is at: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/385 >> I guess the cleanest approach would be to try and get a patch upstreamed >> which specifies a variable for the path to the bundled stuff and have >> our package set that variable accordingly...but that would require >> web-assets-httpd also. > > I will comment more on this after I've read everything you wrote in > the bug. Though from the bits and pieces I picked up skimming over the > bugmail on my phone earlier, I think may need to break into the bottle > of whiskey I usually reserve for patching V8 first. ;-) > > -T.C. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
