Hi Dirk, some comments and a question:
On 08/04/2013 05:49 PM, Dirk Frederickx wrote:
Hi all,
I recently added WRO4J to the build chain of JSPWIKI. (see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-761 for more details)
The main goal is the introduction of a proper build system for the JS and
CSS files, allowing to move away from the current monolithic JS and CSS
files, and break them up in smaller files.
Larger files are not necessarily bad, from the wro4j website itself:
https://code.google.com/p/wro4j/wiki/Introduction:
"It is common knowledge that it is faster to serve one large file rather
than two smaller ones, because of increased HTTP negotiation and the
fact that most browsers only keep two connections open to the same host
at any given time. The purpose of*wro4j*project is to reduce the number
of requests needed to load a page and the amount of data to transfer to
clients, achieving drastic improvement of loading times. The resources
can be benefit also from minification and compression."
JSPWiki-797 and JSPWIKI-798 are created to track further progress on the
refactoring of the javascript and stylesheets of JSPWIKI.
Is it your intention to use wro4j at *runtime* or at *buildtime* to
merge the now-split-up CSS and JS files back into one? wro4j supports
both. The latter I presume would be faster for a running JSPWiki, and I
guess the direction we should go, or?
Related issue, a lot of our JavaScripts and CSS files aren't being used,
for example, the FCKEditor stuff, which doesn't presently work (and
needs to be upgraded to CKEditor anyway.) Regardless of whether we use
wro4j or not, I would like to see us pulling out CSS and JS files that
are not being used with the default deployment (*and* cannot be
activated from the UserPreferences page), and putting them in a separate
folder not part of the build or deployment process (or deleted if it's
old). Our standard JSPWiki WAR should just have those CSS and JS files
callable by the running application, I would think. That would also
make our builds faster and less chatty, as we no longer need to see the
jslint/jshint JavaScript complaints on unused files that weren't written
by us anyway.
Thanks,
Glen
I'd like to get your feedback/comments for these proposed improvements.
(preferably in JIRA) If by next friday, there are no objections, I
consider the proposed way forward accepted.
As this change only affects the build system of jspwiki, I assume a formal
vote is not necessary.
Txs,
dirk
