I've been trying the new stack implementation in T5.2.1 and it's much better. I am having a problem with the order they're put into the page. It seems (I'm guessing/trying to spot a pattern here) to be dependent on the first import of a stack element which means the stacks can easily be requested in an order that means that extensions appear before the definitions of what they're trying to extend. This is a real problem, especially when using modules.
Is there a way to define the order JS stacks are outputted? > -----Original Message----- > From: Blower, Andy [mailto:andy.blo...@proquest.co.uk] > Sent: 21 September 2010 10:08 > To: 'Tapestry users' > Subject: RE: [T5.2] JavaScript combination > > That would be the ideal situation where if a stack was defined > containing CompJS, then if something references CompJS the stack is > brought in. A simpler thing to do would be to simply remove the > individual call to CompJS if the stack containing is imported, but this > is less useful. Either would be far superior to the current behaviour. > > I've raised TAP5-1279 for this issue. Is this likely to get fixed in > the next 3 weeks? If not then I'll need to plan accordingly. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:hls...@gmail.com] > > Sent: 20 September 2010 18:48 > > To: Tapestry users > > Subject: Re: [T5.2] JavaScript combination > > > > Those are great comments; I had thought about imported JS libraries > > "dragging in" a stack and I can't remember why I abandoned it. > Perhaps > > I was trying to be properly agile (don't implement it until there's a > > need). > > > > You case is interesting; a piece of code that blindly imports a JS > > that is already part of a stack. And yes, I think you may be right, > > that that should trigger an import of the stack itself. > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Blower, Andy > > <andy.blo...@proquest.co.uk> wrote: > > > I've created my first stack, and I'm slightly puzzled about the > value > > of this - or maybe I've simply done something wrong. > > > > > > The stack mechanism doesn't seem to be removing duplicate > javascript > > references as I was expecting it to do. 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 only once, > > even if several components asked for the same JS asset. The stack > > system doesn't seem to follow this... > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > Is this working as intended or any I missing something here? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Andy > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Blower, Andy [mailto:andy.blo...@proquest.co.uk] > > >> Sent: 20 September 2010 11:28 > > >> To: 'Tapestry users' > > >> Subject: RE: [T5.2] JavaScript combination > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:hls...@gmail.com] > > >> > Sent: 17 September 2010 22:31 > > >> > To: Tapestry users > > >> > Subject: Re: [T5.2] JavaScript combination > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Blower, Andy > > >> > <andy.blo...@proquest.co.uk> wrote: > > >> > > A few questions: > > >> > > > > >> > > Is there any documentation of the new JavaScript combination > > >> > functionality added to fix TAP5-769 in 5.2, specifically about > > >> stacks? > > >> > I can't see any, but before I dive into code/javadoc I thought > I'd > > >> ask. > > >> > > > >> > Well, there's JavaDoc. > > >> > > > >> I will use that then. > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > Why aren't the prototype & scriptaculous libraries combined > into > > a > > >> > stack by default? > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > They are in production; by default in development the > aggregation > > >> > logic is turned off, as it makes it much faster/easier to debug > on > > >> the > > >> > client side. There's a symbol you can override to enable > > aggregation > > >> > in development mode. > > >> > > >> Right, I saw a couple of scriptaculous libraries separate and > jumped > > to > > >> a conclusion. Why isn't Tap5.2 using the latest version of > > >> scriptaculous? (1.8.3) > > >> > > >> > > What's the status of minifying css & js? > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > No progress on that; concentrating on documentation and getting > > 5.2 > > >> > out the door right now. > > >> > > >> Fair enough > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- > > - > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > > > Creator of Apache Tapestry > > > > The source for Tapestry training, mentoring and support. Contact me > to > > learn how I can get you up and productive in Tapestry fast! > > > > (971) 678-5210 > > http://howardlewisship.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
