For our application I have implemented "delayed load", so for now everything better than it was :))) Now I have time to think about better solution :)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Korbinian Bachl < korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > Welcome to my world :) > > Anyway thanks for the hints. Seems i need somehow to make brix-cms be able > to at least put that into the footer area.... at least thats the only way I > can think of right now; > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax...@gmail.com> > > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:08:15 > > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > > > I love to help here > > But I don't see clear solution ..... > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > > > >> Not really as were on brix-cms, meaning we dont usually touch wicket and > >> loading the complete JS in header is a bad idea as long as its not > capable > >> of beeing defered - the performance gets worse then in our tries > >> > >> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > >> > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax...@gmail.com> > >> > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 10:01:46 > >> > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >> > >> > You can add your scripts to the "custom place" > >> > https://ci.apache.org/projects/wicket/guide/8.x/ > >> single.html#_put_javascript_inside_page_body > >> > And provide your "minified and optimized JS file from webdesigner" > jquery > >> > version as the main one for wicket ..... > >> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > >> > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Yes, you are right - it has to be optional at least, something even > the > >> >> current jQuery reference isn't yet (you only can provide an empty > one js > >> >> file - still a request); > >> >> > >> >> From my experience this all is worse than at the time before jQuery > was > >> >> introduced to wicket as this really slows down the DOM process. In my > >> >> proposal I at least made the mistake that I didnt think of additional > >> >> libraries adding more JS header items - but it should end up with > better > >> >> rendering overall IMHO? > >> >> Maybe a concentation of all these header things in an external > resouce > >> >> file might be the better solution... (e.g.: <script defer > src="/requesrt > >> >> specific fake path"> ) > >> >> > >> >> I originally thought that this might also be put into the footer, > right > >> >> before the </body> tag, but Andrea del Bene was against it pointing > to > >> the > >> >> new defer / async properties which is somehow right. > >> >> > >> >> In my app the problem is that I load 2 times the whole jQuery... and > 1 > >> >> only for wicket as 2nd one is from a minified and optimized JS file > from > >> >> webdesigner; > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > >> >> > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax...@gmail.com> > >> >> > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >> >> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 09:47:38 > >> >> > Betreff: Re: 8.0.0 blockers > >> >> > >> >> > Hello Korbinian, > >> >> > > >> >> > I have analyzed this issue using our main application. > >> >> > I have extremely bad report from Chrome Audit tool > >> >> > Application took 16 seconds to display something meaningful > >> >> > > >> >> > My first intent was to work with Wicket internals to optimize load > >> time. > >> >> > BUT My initial page loads lots of scripts from wicketstuff, > >> >> > wicket-jquery-ui and some internal JS files > >> >> > > >> >> > So I did the following: initially empty panel with of these pure > CSS > >> >> > loaders http://tobiasahlin.com/spinkit/ is loaded > >> >> > Additionally jquery+wicket-ajax+wicket-event are loaded to > register > >> >> handler > >> >> > > >> >> > as soon as handler will get onload event it will start "main" > loading > >> >> > > >> >> > This way user will see sort of progress while loading is being > >> performed > >> >> in > >> >> > the background > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Your proposal can be implemented, but there should be an option to > >> turn > >> >> off > >> >> > wrapping every script with "window.addEventListener(' > >> DOMContentLoaded', > >> >> > function() {" > >> >> > > >> >> > I can work on this issue but I would like to hear thought of > "senior" > >> >> > members first :))) > >> >> > > >> >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Korbinian Bachl < > >> >> > korbinian.ba...@whiskyworld.de> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> I'd like some comment on WICKET-6498, as that wicket-JS impl. > >> currently > >> >> is > >> >> >> just not good IMHO as its blocking the DOM with JS; > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Best, > >> >> >> > >> >> >> KB > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > >> >> >> > Von: "Maxim Solodovnik" <solomax...@gmail.com> > >> >> >> > An: dev@wicket.apache.org > >> >> >> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. November 2017 03:32:48 > >> >> >> > Betreff: 8.0.0 blockers > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Hello All, > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > do we have any blockers for 8.0.0? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -- > >> >> >> > WBR > >> >> >> > Maxim aka solomax > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > WBR > >> >> > Maxim aka solomax > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > WBR > >> > Maxim aka solomax > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > WBR > > Maxim aka solomax > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
