Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 73461 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2009 22:57:00 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Jul 2009 22:57:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 88830 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jul 2009 22:57:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 88733 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jul 2009 22:57:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 88725 invoked by uid 99); 15 Jul 2009 22:57:09 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:57:09 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [98.136.44.59] (HELO smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com) (98.136.44.59) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:57:01 +0000 Received: (qmail 30124 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2009 22:56:40 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-Id:From:To:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:References:X-Mailer; b=aLIga8bsQp2gRcLKxCQHS7EkEoACqtzmL5SzG2fn9AnQagg1jZ4ddpWHJtUMwKr8yGFwUgSU/bDm7HhhaY1vs+l5iek87lWLF03yQPAHmi0mHdpMtaI+bg/cjbAPIbjFhIEdoIJkvDDaKr/8U8DHlmXbgoKZj2CBy6HiFOUtSoU= ; Received: from 076-076-148-215.pdx.net (david_jencks@76.76.148.215 with plain) by smtp104.prem.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2009 15:56:39 -0700 PDT X-Yahoo-SMTP: .9oIUzyswBANsYgUm_5uPui0skTnzGJXJQ-- X-YMail-OSG: iW2SBbkVM1muotDdsuQeUXlNDV_m5ug1XRFL.g4X2FnyiLKzBng4xI2JNcHjWw1TitPrhuA.te9_SK_tuiG.WVhRABqnA7EuUbLwK3I280aSTrPxgqTrYYCD._FsDkbEhtD8yEQ06Aw7okEa8UylMiCQDXF2XO8GCAF9xzWio5bEahSak6tk1QujXtro66zzVNb_2nyl59hGwdlSp812yfDlyuAadnfNypVfOAh9j.g4ySYQ20Lw2aendsgsQWKDomuS1.a5P02Yrv7dkanh9IUYHk2RFFLfQHVauR6PWQBu4E17kBvyIG6v12jogTT.wHR8SmTOu3zMFtFELEQ- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-Id: <8DDB034A-24DD-4DDC-99A9-C56FA3E910FD@yahoo.com> From: David Jencks To: dev@geronimo.apache.org In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-26-955942251 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Subject: Re: Which dojo? Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:56:38 -0700 References: <48C00BD3-A605-4EFC-9D2C-AC231D2CD9C0@yahoo.com> <9A518F3F-7E72-46D4-8CC4-C98688903B4D@yahoo.com> <4A5664C8.5000103@gmail.com> <51878F5E-C49B-4C6C-B85E-FAABFE654E62@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --Apple-Mail-26-955942251 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Jul 15, 2009, at 11:12 AM, David Jencks wrote: > > On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Rex Wang wrote: > >> tried it. >> >> 1. >> svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3 >> mvn clean install >> success! >> >> 2. >> modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff >> the patch in attachment shows the modification. >> build successfully >> >> 3. >> 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" >> >> results: >> 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? thanks david jencks > > wishing I understood javascript delivery even a little bit... > david jencks > >> >> HTH >> Rex. >> >> >> 2009/7/15 Rex Wang >> I'd like to try it :-) >> -Rex >> >> 2009/7/15 David Jencks >> >> 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). >> >> Jay, >> If you can test with the latest Dojo version and things look good >> to you, I'd say go ahead and apply the updates. >> >> --kevan >> >> >> > --Apple-Mail-26-955942251 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Jul 15, 2009, = at 11:12 AM, David Jencks wrote:


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

tried it. =

1.
svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk= /geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
mvn clean = install
success!

2.
modify the plugins/dojo-legacy = stuff
the patch in attachment shows the modification.
build = successfully

3.
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"
=
results:
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?

thanks
david = jencks

HTH
Rex.


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

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).

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

--kevan
=

=

= <dojo-legacy.patch>

= --Apple-Mail-26-955942251--