launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Robert Collins <robert.collins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Gary Poster <gary.poster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Therefore, as I assemble the picture around me, we have a broken JS packaging story now that is both significantly in flux and not necessarily appropriate for including all of the sorts of things we need in our local applications.

Right now, Tim and Deryck amongst others have been landing regular
patches on lazr-js - 10 so far this year. It may be broken in
principle, but in practice its working.

> My team's mission right now is not to solve Launchpad's or Canonical's JS packaging story, and I would not like to be slowed down by it.  Brad's approach sounds reasonable, acknowledging that it is a stop-gap, and that we would like to use something better, and possibly even that Launchpad would want to help in Canonical's effort to figure it out better--as a separately scheduled effort.

I don't see why the packaging story is part of this; is there
something I'm missing?

> I'm very happy to be corrected, but most happy to have a clear path forward on this that lets my team move quickly.  Brad's is the only one I have (understand?) at the moment.

Drop the files in lazr-js instead, done. That should work on a
technical level as I understand it.

Yes, lazr-js has a wider mandate than *just* Launchpad, however the
Launchpad team is the maintainer for lazr-js, just like we are the
maintainers of Launchpad itself. That means we shouldn't hesitate to
do things in lazr-js that fit better there than elsewhere. I agree
that lazr-js isn't ideal, but launchpad itself is less ideal : so
putting it in lazr-js would be an improvement.

AIUI this is no harder than putting it in Launchpad, and certainly
doesn't need the packaging story overhauled to do.

-Rob