geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Reducing the dojo footprint in Geronimo
Date Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:52:31 GMT
I have a faint recollection of someone saying that dojo had a feature  
whereby it could come up with a application-specific bundle containing  
only the dojo stuff used by the app.  If so, maybe we could include  
"all" of dojo (whatever that means) in the repo but use this  
customization feature to extract what the console actually uses???

there's at least a 90% chance this doesn't make any sense, so feel  
free to ignore or point out how/why it doesn't :-)
thanks
david jencks

On Jun 26, 2008, at 12:35 PM, Joseph Leong wrote:

> Actually thinking about this further, i'm not so sure stripping out  
> DojoX would be a good idea.  DojoX has a lot features, and i realize  
> we aren't using them now.  But thinking about it the process of  
> stripping down DojoX to just the components in Monitoring might be a  
> maintenance nightmare.  Taking a deeper look, there are a lot of  
> dependencies and trails that you have to follow in the js files to  
> completely separate out functioning pieces of dojox.  In addition,  
> if anyone were to add a another dojox feature, we'd have to follow  
> suite with stripping out that component exclusively to achieve a  
> small package size.  Thoughts?
>
> -Joseph Leong
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Joseph Leong  
> <josephcleong@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jason,
>
> I agree with that approach.  The widget and other components are the  
> mainstream features.  In efforts to reducing the size and to support  
> the monitoring features , i don't see why not just leave the  
> charting features.  Does anyone else see a problem with this?
>
> -Joseph Leong
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Jason Warner <jaw981@gmail.com>  
> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> Is it possible to pull in just the dojox charting features?  I think  
> the main driving factor of this is to drop dojox as that is 80% of  
> the weight that would be dropped.  If we can't keep just the  
> charting features, then we're going to have to keep all of dojox or  
> change how the monitoring plugin draws the graphs (I assume that's  
> what it's used for).
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Joseph Leong  
> <josephcleong@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Shrey,
>
> I think that makes a lot of sense, especially with the tests and  
> demos.  My only comment is i believe the monitoring plugin may use  
> some of the DojoX charting features.  However, after doing some  
> research with dojo and AG regarding the 0.4->1.1.1 conversion i  
> think that was the only plugin with dojox issues.  Other than that,  
> great idea on reducing the dojo footprint.
>
> -Joseph Leong
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Lin Sun <linsun.unc@gmail.com>  
> wrote:
> Hi, what you propose makes sense to me.  Can you suggest the best way
> to achieve this, possibly in a JIRA with a patch?
>
> Thanks, Lin
>
> On 6/26/08, Shrey Banga <banga.shrey@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've been working on the EAR PlanCreator and I've observed that  
> dojo is
> > shipped with all the demos, tests and experimental widgets in  
> place, causing
> > the folder to be about 12.8 MB on the expanded server (2.2- 
> SNAPSHOT).
> >  Looking at the various folders, I think we can achieve significant
> > reduction in the dojo footprint and eventually of the server  
> itself by
> > removing the following components:
> > dojo/tests - 579 KB
> > dijit/tests - 551 KB
> >  dijit/demos - 909 KB
> > dojox - 6.82 MB
> >
> > From a geronimo user's perspective, the tests suite is not of much  
> use as
> > they are meant to test the widgets provided by dojo itself which  
> can be
> > tested by separately downloading the given release instead of  
> shipping it
> > with the server. Similarly, the demos, which are used to exhibit  
> dojo's
> > capabilities, can be run directly from dojo's website or  
> downloaded and run
> > locally without the server. Also, people trying to learn from the  
> demos tend
> > to use the css provided for the purpose of the demo, which is not
> > recommended.
> >  My rationale for removing the dojox is that these are marked as
> > experimental by the dojo community and although some components  
> are used
> > often, keeping 6.8 MBs of code that is still experimental does not  
> make
> > sense. It is better to trust the dojo community to shift  
> components from
> > experimental to stable areas and then use them in further releases.
> >
> > Removing the stated components frees up about 8.7 MBs of space on  
> the
> > expanded server, which is huge for a javascript library. Since a  
> Geronimo
> > user can still include these components into his/her webapp we're  
> not really
> > stopping them from using these components, only transferring the  
> overhead of
> > using the lesser used components onto the user.
> >  --
> > Shrey Banga
> > Bachelor of Technology, III year
> > Department of Electrical Engineering
> > Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ~Jason Warner
>
>


Mime
View raw message