geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jay D. McHugh" <>
Subject Re: Reducing the dojo footprint in Geronimo
Date Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:26:02 GMT
I have thought about this a lot (since I have become very accustomed to 
having Dojo 'just be there').

And the consensus (or at least what appears to be becoming the 
consensus) of only including what is needed for the admin console is 
probably the best idea.  Especially since the installed size of Dojo has 
ballooned from around 6Meg to around 22Meg.

Along with this, we should probably also drop the 'dojo-legacy' plugin 
(as soon as the work to upgrade to using the 1.1.x version of Dojo is 
completed).  And we should provide a plugin for the full Dojo install. 
It is easy enough to provide and will help those who have gotten used to 
having Dojo 'just be there' - upgrade with a minimum of pain.


Donald Woods wrote:
> Sounds like the right solution, given that would allow our console to 
> upgrade at a slower pace and would allow users to choose their own level...
> Other option, is to drop the /dojo webapp in 2.2, only ship what we need 
> in the console and let users package the Dojo level and features they 
> need within their own apps (which is more portable across different 
> servers anyway....)
> -Donald
> Kevan Miller wrote:
>> On Jun 27, 2008, at 11:00 AM, Shrey Banga wrote:
>>> As for the including the rest of DojoX, since it a significant part 
>>> of the reducing effort.  Would it make sense to build a custom js for 
>>> monitoring, remove the rest of DojoX and if the development starts 
>>> shifting to a real need for DojoX to make a decision to bring it back 
>>> in the future?
>>> I think that makes perfect sense- not only will this do the part in 
>>> reducing the dojo footprint, it'll also be useful as an example to 
>>> how dojo should be used optimally in deployment. Another desirable 
>>> side-effect would be reduced load times in the monitoring 
>>> application, although currently that is not an issue.
>> I'm starting to think that our server should deliver dojo support that 
>> is targeted to the requirements of the admin console.
>> For general dojo support, we could provide an installable dojo plugin 
>> that's equivalent to the /dojo support we currently provide...
>> --kevan

View raw message