Yes, that's working beautifully. Now I know about it... ;-) Thanks Howard!
> -----Original Message----- > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:hls...@gmail.com] > Sent: 11 October 2010 17:45 > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: [T5.2] JavaScript combination > > Yes, stacks can have dependencies on other stacks. Is that not working > correctly? > > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Blower, Andy > <andy.blo...@proquest.co.uk> wrote: > > 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 > > > > > > > > -- > 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
