I looked at the two war files and they are different and I wonder what we actually use.
-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??
2009/7/15 Rex Wang <email@example.com>
I'd like to try it :-)
2009/7/15 David Jencks <firstname.lastname@example.org>
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
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)
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:
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.