[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Howard M. Lewis Ship updated TAP5-1279: --------------------------------------- Summary: Importing a JavaScript library that is part of a stack should import the entire stack instead of the individual library (to take advantage of JavaScript aggregation) (was: The stack model for JavaScript combination doesn't de-duplicate individual references) > Importing a JavaScript library that is part of a stack should import the > entire stack instead of the individual library (to take advantage of > JavaScript aggregation) > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: TAP5-1279 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1279 > Project: Tapestry 5 > Issue Type: Bug > Components: tapestry-core > Affects Versions: 5.2.0, 5.2.1 > Reporter: Andy Blower > Assignee: Howard M. Lewis Ship > > The stack mechanism doesn't seem to be removing duplicate javascript > references as I expect it to. Tapestry JS has always worked on a component > requesting the JS assets it needs and then Tapestry ensured that each > required JS asset was added to the page once and only once, even if several > components asked for the same JS asset. The stack system doesn't seem to > follow this model... > For example, say I have a component "Comp" that specifies it needs the > "CompJS" asset, and is used on pages "Page1" and "Page2". If Page1 doesn't > have much more to it and only needs CompJS then that's what should be > included by Tapestry, since Comp @Import's CompJS. All well and good. > Now, if Page2 has a lot of other components with their own JS files which are > then combined into a T5 stack and requested by the page's @Import then I > would not expect CompJS to be referenced on the page since it's already > included in the stack file. It seems to be in T5.2.0 with my testing. > Unless I'm mistaken about how this is working, then I fail to see how this > stack mechanism provides much benefit over simply putting all my projects' JS > into a single file and referencing that in each page. The only advantage is > to split it up into easily editable chunks, I still have to manage the > aggregation. I think it's going to be very easy to get duplicate JS in the > rendered html page with this system. > If a stack is imported which contains CompJS, and another component imports > CompJS individually, just output the reference to the stack, and not CompJS. > There are two ways to implement the remaining behaviour: > 1) If the stack is not imported, and a component imports CompJS individually, > just output the reference to CompJS. > 2) If the stack is not imported, and a component imports CompJS individually, > output a reference to the stack containing CompJS. This is more difficult and > may be tricky if the component has been defined as being part of more than > one stack. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.