Since https://github.com/theforeman/foreman/pull/5083 was merged most of my
issues with turbolinks have been fixed so I'm fine keeping it until we can
replace it with a true single page application.
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Daniel Lobato Garcia
wrote:
> On 12/06, Walden Raines wrote:
> >
On 12/06, Walden Raines wrote:
> I am seeing more and more issues [1][2] around turbolinks and I'm wondering
> if it's time to remove it from foreman. I have seen it recommended that
> one shouldn't use the back button in foreman; I thought that request was
> reserved for poorly written php sites
+1 to the comments above, moving forward with React will allow us to drop
turbolinks at some point without a noticeable decrease in UI performance -
at least that is my hope.
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Ohad Levy wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Walden Raines wrote:
>
>> I am se
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Walden Raines wrote:
> I am seeing more and more issues [1][2] around turbolinks and I'm
> wondering if it's time to remove it from foreman. I have seen it
> recommended that one shouldn't use the back button in foreman; I thought
> that request was reserved for p
The idea behind turbolinks is good in general - it works great when
you have a standard Rails application with its view stack (ERB). When
I saw this talked, I liked it very much:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWEts0rlezA
Unfortunately, we are not good fit. This works for a clean app which
ERB a
I am seeing more and more issues [1][2] around turbolinks and I'm wondering
if it's time to remove it from foreman. I have seen it recommended that
one shouldn't use the back button in foreman; I thought that request was
reserved for poorly written php sites that resubmit forms when the back
butto
