I disagree with your assessment (and so does the majority of people on that pull request, it seems).
It's always better to use a CDN because:
1. It has a chance to be already cached (specially if you use Google's CDN).
2. All browsers nowadays do 6 parallel requests per host. So using DNS prefetching with `rel=dns-prefetch` will be faster.
3. If you bundle jQuery with your site's JS files, every time you change a single JS file of your own, your users will be forced to re-download your bundled jQuery. Seems pretty inefficient to me.
It wasn't MY assessment, I just posted the assessment of other s to start the conversation. I don't think you should never use a CDN, there are quite valid reasons to do so. But people shouldn't go around saying that is the only way to go either. It should depend on your site, and the testing you do on that site.
It's always better to use a CDN because:
1. It has a chance to be already cached (specially if you use Google's CDN).
2. All browsers nowadays do 6 parallel requests per host. So using DNS prefetching with `rel=dns-prefetch` will be faster.
3. If you bundle jQuery with your site's JS files, every time you change a single JS file of your own, your users will be forced to re-download your bundled jQuery. Seems pretty inefficient to me.