Hi I found this patch won't work on IE, so i have fixed it and will send updated patch.
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Surinder Kumar < [email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Dave Page <[email protected]> wrote: > >> When you say "un-vendorising", do you mean removing them from the vendor >> directory and adding them to packages.json so they're pulled in via >> npm/yarn? (if so, good :-) ) >> > Yes. > >> >> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Surinder Kumar < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> *Detailed changes:* >>> >>> 1) Created a file bundle/app.js which loads `browser.js` and then >>> 'tools.datagrid' and its other dependents are configured to load in >>> '`imports-loader` >>> >>> 2) bundle/codemirror.js - it generates a bundled JS which is used >>> wherever required in various modules. >>> >>> 3) file_utils.js - It bundles the file manager's utility JS file and >>> loaded from `file manager/index.html` >>> >>> 4) lib_css - It contains list of vendor CSS to be bundled. >>> >>> 5) pgadmin_css - It contains list of overrides CSS which are bundled and >>> which has to load after vendors CSS is loaded. >>> >>> *Various Webpack configuration parameters:* >>> >>> 1) externals: List of template files to be loaded dynamically when a >>> call is made by dependent modules. These files are excluded from the >>> bundled JS. >>> >>> 2) resolve > alias - This resolves the path of module JS which is >>> referred in other modules; For example: >>> 'backbone': path.join(__dirname, './node_modules/backbone/backbone') >>> >>> 3) `backbone` is used in 'define(['backbone'])' calls and its path is >>> resolved to above absolute path. >>> >>> 4) 'pgLibs': List of files to bundle into `pgadmin_commons.js`. The >>> purpose is to separate files other than browser node modules JS in >>> `pgadmin_commons.js` and browser node modules JS in `app.bundle.js`. It >>> will help in debugging the code during development. >>> >>> *Un-vendor modules:* >>> >>> All modules are un-vendored except: >>> - requireJS >>> - Backgrid JS - it gives reference error when importing backgrid.css >>> from node_modules in bundle/lib.css even if the path is correct. I logged >>> an issue: >>> Opened an issue >>> <https://github.com/webpack-contrib/css-loader/issues/567> >>> >>> - React JS - I didn't un-vendor React JS because the pivotal developers >>> submitted a patch to fix issue of QtWebEngine. Once the patch is merged in >>> React repo, we will un-vendor. >>> >>> *Other issues faced:* >>> >>> 1) Backbone JS: I didn't upgraded backbone JS to latest because it >>> affects the application code mainly `Preferences module`. >>> >>> 2) jQuery: I didn't upgraded it to latest because it is gives error in >>> loading wcIframe of wcDocker in Query tool. I submit a PR >>> <https://github.com/WebCabin/wcDocker/pull/118>. >>> >>> 3) Acitree - it is not available in yarn repository. logged an request >>> <https://github.com/dragosu/jquery-aciTree/issues/15> >>> However i am managing it on my github account by forking this repo. >>> >>> Specified the repo github link to `acitree` in package.json with tag to >>> pull from >>> 4.5.0-rc.7 >>> <https://github.com/imsurinder90/jquery-aciTree.git#4.5.0-rc.7>. The >>> latest version of actiree has issues so code is used form 4.5.0-rc.7 tag. >>> >>> Thanks to bestander <https://github.com/bestander> for helping this >>> out. link to thread >>> <https://github.com/yarnpkg/yarn/issues/1747#issuecomment-312502008> >>> >>> *Plugins used:* >>> >>> - optimize-css-assets-webpack-plugin: its job is to optimise the CSS >>> bundle like minifying CSS and removing comments from it. [used only in >>> production] >>> >>> - uglifyJS - It minimise the bundled JS, and remove console statements >>> from code. [used only in production] >>> >>> - definePlugin - It helps in minimising the `React' production bundle. >>> As react has conditional code based on 'NODE_ENV' variable. [used only in >>> production] >>> >>> - providePlugin - It makes the variable defined through out the >>> application context. For example: jQuery object can be accessed wherever >>> it is used but not included in `define` calls. >>> >>> - CommonsChunkPlugin - it helps in separating vendor like code, common >>> dependent modules used in multiple modules. it extracts out in a file. >>> >>> - extractTextPlugin - it is used in combination with 'css-loader' and >>> 'style-loader'. It helps in extracting CSS and moved into files. >>> >>> - webpack-bundle-analyzer - it helps in analysing the bundled JS files >>> like size of bundled JS and which JS files are included in bundle. It is >>> commented out. [Use only when need to analyse] >>> >>> *Loaders used:* >>> >>> - shim-loader: It manages the module dependency, uses the same >>> configuration used in requireJS >>> >>> - imports-loader: It also used to loaded dependent modules which are >>> defined in its `use` setting. >>> >>> - file-loader - It helps in extracting font, image files into a separate >>> directory. >>> >>> - css-loader - Imports css files included in modules using `require` and >>> `import` calls. >>> >>> *TODO:* >>> >>> 1) Automatically handle static and template JS files: This is already >>> being discussed. Once it is sorted out, we will change webpack >>> configuration accordingly. >>> >>> 2) Implementing Caching: I will look into this once an initial patch is >>> commited. and later on add as improvement. >>> >>> 3) Source maps: It will help in debugging bundled JS code in production >>> environment. >>> >>> 4) Feature tests are failing: I am currently looking into it. Query tool >>> functionality is working fine, the issue is it is unable to find code >>> mirror. >>> >>> *Steps to run:* >>> >>> After applying patch:* git apply --binary /path/to/patch* >>> >>> run* `yarn install`* >>> then run: >>> >>> **In development mode: >>> *yarn run bundle:dev* >>> >>> In production mode: >>> *yarn run bundle:prod* >>> >>> *Performance comparison:* >>> >>> On Mac's Chrome - Before bundle it was taking ~9sec to load page. After >>> bundle it took 3.5secs (with no cache) >>> >>> Please review the patch. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Surinder >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 8:22 PM, Sarah McAlear <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> >>>>> *Things to discuss:* >>>>> >>>>> How to differentiate between a static and template JS >>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> What is the advantage of webpacking templated JS? It seems as though >>>> this creates a system in which the bundled dependencies have to refer back >>>> to the backend to load the templates. >>>> >>>> If there is a performance win in packing templated JS then looking at >>>> it makes sense. Otherwise it may make sense to put off until it is clear >>>> that the templated files should be dealt with by either de-templating them >>>> or bundling them where there is a clear reason. >>>> >>>> However, we're wondering about possible performance penalties with >>>> templating larger files (as opposed to templating on-demand.) Since jinja >>>> templates can execute arbitrary python, this could get time expensive and >>>> further slow things like initial page-load. >>>> Another concern is: what happens when a template gets out of date (e.g. >>>> if browser.js had previously filled in the content for 'panel_item.content' >>>> and had been cached, would it render a new version with the new values when >>>> needed? Or is it possible that we would get old content?) >>>> >>>> >>>>> *Taks remaining:* >>>>> >>>>> 1. >>>>> Fix local variables which are declared without using var, have to >>>>> check in each file >>>>> by >>>>> running eslint (For now, i will fix only errors which are giving >>>>> error in browser). >>>>> >>>>> 2. >>>>> Move non-template files from ’templates’ to ’static’ directory. List of >>>>> pending >>>>> modules is here: >>>>> >>>>> - Tools (mostly all modules - 9 modules) >>>>> - Browser nodes - 3 modules(resource group, roles, tablespace) >>>>> - About >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Also can we move >>>>> ' >>>>> dashboard, statistic >>>>> s >>>>> , preferences and help >>>>> ' >>>>> modules inside misc to preserve modularity as pgAdmin is modular >>>>> ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Is there anything from a organization stance you discussed in the >>>> previous email that needs to be done to make this usable and consistent? >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> George & Sarah >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Dave Page >> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >> Twitter: @pgsnake >> >> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >> > >
