On Jul 15, 2009, at 11:12 AM, David Jencks wrote:

On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Rex Wang wrote:

tried it.

svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
mvn clean install

modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff
the patch in attachment shows the modification.
build successfully

I did not build the entire server, but just remove the old one, and install the new one.
I believe only the debug-views portlets use this legacy dojo, because when I stop the dojo-legacy-tomcat plugin, only the debugviews-console-tomcat web project stopped autoly. and I also searched all the jsps underneath plugins folder in the server build tree, only show the ones from debugviews holding reference to "/dojo/0.4/dojo.js"

Unfortunately, the debugviews portlet don't display corretly...

I make some screen shot. Shall we open a jira for this so that I can upload them, which apparently shows dojo not work correctly?

Or we could try to fix them :-)

I looked at the two war files and they are different and I wonder what we actually use.

old war (geronimo-dojo-legacy):
  -rw-r--r--    151841  15-May-2007  02:11:02  dojo.js
  -rw-r--r--    326567  15-May-2007  02:11:04  dojo.js.uncompressed.js
  -rw-r--r--      1170  15-May-2007  02:06:02  flash6_gateway.swf
  -rw-r--r--      2364  15-May-2007  02:06:02  iframe_history.html
  -rw-r--r--     11346  15-May-2007  02:06:02  LICENSE
  -rw-r--r--     13133  14-Jul-2009  15:01:02  META-INF/LICENSE
  -rw-r--r--       587  14-Jul-2009  15:01:02  META-INF/NOTICE
  -rw-r--r--      1609  15-May-2007  02:11:32  src/a11y.js
everything else is under src/

new war (geronimo-dojo-0.4.3):
just the contents of src from geronimo-dojo-legacy.

So what do we actually use here?  if its just dojo.js we can shrink it by leaving out the uncompressed.js and all the little files.  If its just the little files under src we can use the new war and change the references to leave out the "src/" bit.  Maybe I can come up with an alternate profile to build a war with just dojo.js in it??

My latest theory is that the only file we use is dojo.js.  My other theory here is that if we can legally have the dojo zip file in an svn repo then we can just as well have the dojo.js text file in our svn repo as a source file.

So I modified the externals project to just include this file, from src/main/webapp.  I also fixed the groupId.

Could you try out this revised version?

david jencks

wishing I understood javascript delivery even a little bit...
david jencks


2009/7/15 Rex Wang <rwonly@gmail.com>
I'd like to try it :-)

2009/7/15 David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com>

Jay -- many thanks for trying out the patch and committing it.

I think the last artifact in our svn repo is the dojo 0.4.3.  I can't find it released anywhere but the source code is in a handy svn repo.  I cooked up a modification of our war-packaging for it that uses the maven scm plugin to check out the source so it can be packaged easily.  I wonder if someone could try this out and see if it works?

-- check out new war project and build it
svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
cd geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
mvn clean install

-- modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff so that
geronimo-dojo-legacy is not built
the dojo-legacy-jetty and dojo-legacy-tomcat plugins use the geronimo-dojo-0.4.3-1.0-SNAPSHOT war file instead of the geronimo-dojo-legacy war.

-- build the server and see if the parts that use the legacy dojo still work  (debug views??? I'm not sure)

many thanks
david jencks

On Jul 10, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:

On Jul 9, 2009, at 5:59 PM, David Jencks wrote:

On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Jay D. McHugh wrote:

Hey David,

I'm starting to take a look at it today.

They have a 1.3.1 version out - any objections to me switching the patch
to use it?

Not at all -- I just thought I'd start small since usually I change 18 things at once and then can't tell what change broke what feature :-)

I think kevan mentioned offline he might take a look also.  I think I've been running locally with this patch for a couple weeks and haven't seen any admin console problems, but that doesn't mean much one way or another.

I built with the patch and ran testsuite on Jetty. Everything looked good to me (except for a corba-testsuite test that hung).

If you can test with the latest Dojo version and things look good to you, I'd say go ahead and apply the updates.