tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: packaging javascript?

matthew sporleder <> writes:

> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Greg Troxel <> wrote:
>> People at tahoe-lafs are struggling with how to depend on javascript
>> code used by new code to visualize network performance:
>> Â
>> Â(background in
>> tahoe has a goal of being able to just download the source tarball and
>> type ./ foo and be able to run; this is not relevant to pkgsrc.
>> However, they're running into the problem that js libraries aren't
>> culturally aligned with packaging systems. ÂI'd like to be able to say
>> that Protovis is packaged already and that tahoe should just look for
>> the bits in $PREFIX/share/javascript/protovis/foo.js, but that seems not
>> to be true. ÂUnrelated but similar, there's openlayers.
>> Â
>> Â
>> Does anyone have thoughts on packaging these?
> Should this live in htdocs?  Does do anything special?

I don't think tahoe's deals with this yet.  But I don't think
it belongs in htdocs - I'm not talking about using this on, but having it in pkgsrc so that someone running tahoe
can depend on this to get the bits present in /usr/pkg/share someplace,
rather than having to do it by hand, or have tahoe download the bits at
build time, or put the bits in tahoe VC system.

Attachment: pgpnfRqcj7plo.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index