...which is a bit different from what Michael was originally proposing:<div><br></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>"<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">The live version would contain the same functional code minus excess whitespace and comments. I would not use any compression or package application to obfuscate the code.</span>"</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think condensing/minifying is different from compressing. The former I would see as not even a question; the latter, of course, would be an entirely different matter. Fortunately, as far as I'm aware, nobody's tried to submit anything with compressed/obfuscated code. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I'm with you, in that I would favor not allowing obfuscated code, even with a "dev" version against which to compare it.</div><div><br></div><div>Chip</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Otto <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:otto@ottodestruct.com">otto@ottodestruct.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Ideally, I wouldn't want compressed scripts in there at all, unless<br>
they are open source scripts that come in a compressed version to<br>
begin with.<br>
<br>
If they have a dev.js and a compressed .js script, like the core does,<br>
then there should be some form of instructions as to how to compress<br>
the script, and the results should match. For the sake of preventing<br>
malware, if a theme reviewer is going to allow compressed scripts at<br>
all, then yeah, they should verify that the compression method<br>
produces the same results.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
-Otto<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Vicky Arulsingam<br>
<<a href="mailto:vicky.arulsingam@gmail.com">vicky.arulsingam@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Otto <<a href="mailto:otto@ottodestruct.com">otto@ottodestruct.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> BTW, it would be nice if you specified how you were going to compress<br>
>> it in the comments or something. We don't want a case where somebody<br>
>> compresses something with malware in it, and then nobody notices. Your<br>
>> results should be reproducible.<br>
>><br>
>> -Otto<br>
>><br>
><br>
> Should theme reviewers compress the dev script and see if it matches the<br>
> compressed version?<br>
><br>
> -----<br>
> Vicky Arulsingam<br>
><br>
</div></div><div><div></div><div class="h5">> _______________________________________________<br>
> theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
theme-reviewers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org">theme-reviewers@lists.wordpress.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers" target="_blank">http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>