Re: [uportal-dev] Javascript performance issues
Hi Chris, So far, I haven't used the aggregation options. Last time we went over these issues, we'd talked about naming files such that they could have a long-term cache header applied to them. I haven't thought of a good way to combine that goal with aggregating files in the build, although I'm certainly open to any suggestions. - Jen On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Christopher Doyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great news about the Fluid Reorderer, Jen! We are using the yui compressor plugin at Hopkins, and that's definitely something we'd like to see added back into the project. There's already a JIRA ticket for it, too – UP-2159. Did you use the aggregation options at all? --Chris -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
RE: [uportal-dev] Javascript performance issues
Great news about the Fluid Reorderer, Jen! We are using the yui compressor plugin at Hopkins, and that's definitely something we'd like to see added back into the project. There's already a JIRA ticket for it, too - UP-2159. Did you use the aggregation options at all? --Chris From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jen Bourey Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 10:15 PM To: uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org Subject: [uportal-dev] Javascript performance issues Hi all, Now that the Fluid Reorderer has been integrated into uPortal, I wanted to discuss some of the Javascript optimizations issues that have come up before on the list. In particular, Tuy had run and sent the results of Yahoo's YSlow tool and identified some areas where we could make improvements. To reduce the number of HTTP requests per page, I've tried combining related javascript files into a common file. I've also used the maven yui compressor plugin to minify uPortal javascript code (jquery and Fluid code is already minified in the source). Are these changes people would like to see added to the source? I also wanted other opinions on how much of the jQuery UI library and CSS we'd like to include in the uPortal distribution. In the past, we included all the core library pieces and widgets in the source, and only included in the page the files that were necessary. Combining javascript files into a common file would make this approach hard to accomplish. Should we only include needed resources in the main jquery ui portal file? In that scenario, portal administrators would need to add additional javascript resources, rather than just linking to them. Right now in my local development portal, combining a pared-down javascript dependency set and maven minification of javscript and css has led to 166kb of javascript and 44kb of css for base uportal pages. Turning on gzipping in tomcat leads to 51kb of javascript and 11kb of css. It seems like this is a step in the right direction for us, and the reduced download set would probably come in useful in most portal installations. I just want to make sure we don't make it difficult to add other needed jquery or Fluid library resources to the portal. - Jen -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
[uportal-dev] Javascript performance issues
Hi all, Now that the Fluid Reorderer has been integrated into uPortal, I wanted to discuss some of the Javascript optimizations issues that have come up before on the list. In particular, Tuy had run and sent the results of Yahoo's YSlow tool and identified some areas where we could make improvements. To reduce the number of HTTP requests per page, I've tried combining related javascript files into a common file. I've also used the maven yui compressor plugin to minify uPortal javascript code (jquery and Fluid code is already minified in the source). Are these changes people would like to see added to the source? I also wanted other opinions on how much of the jQuery UI library and CSS we'd like to include in the uPortal distribution. In the past, we included all the core library pieces and widgets in the source, and only included in the page the files that were necessary. Combining javascript files into a common file would make this approach hard to accomplish. Should we only include needed resources in the main jquery ui portal file? In that scenario, portal administrators would need to add additional javascript resources, rather than just linking to them. Right now in my local development portal, combining a pared-down javascript dependency set and maven minification of javscript and css has led to 166kb of javascript and 44kb of css for base uportal pages. Turning on gzipping in tomcat leads to 51kb of javascript and 11kb of css. It seems like this is a step in the right direction for us, and the reduced download set would probably come in useful in most portal installations. I just want to make sure we don't make it difficult to add other needed jquery or Fluid library resources to the portal. - Jen -- You are currently subscribed to uportal-dev@lists.ja-sig.org as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/uportal-dev
