Hi, how the files get built into a release artefact is orthogonal to how they work in the browser. Using grunt means we get a lot of stuff for zero effort (vs building our own things), it's easy to install and use and results in plain old html, css and js files to serve out of _utlis in a release while also letting developers use the code as a couchapp for development if they so choose.
I took a first stab at getting grunt/bbb building our prototype into share/www and serving from localhost:5984/_utils this morning and it works as expected. There are some other nits to work through, but I'm happy with it as a proof of concept. I agree using node in the browser is overkill for this and should be avoided. Cheers Simon On Thursday, 25 October 2012 at 17:01, Garren Smith wrote: > I think I need to explain that bit. If we want to use Bootstrap and less.js > we need a build tool that will compile the less files into css and then > upload the couchapp into couchdb. Grunt.js is a good fit but it is an extra > dependancy as it requires node.js. Maybe Erica could do that instead. At this > stage these are pretty minor issues that will be easy to sort out later. > > > On 25 Oct 2012, at 5:57 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected] > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Garren Smith <[email protected] > > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > What Couchapp tool do we use? > > > Erica seems a good choice with it being talked about with Couchdb > > > otherwise Nodejs + Couchapp + grunt.js could also be a good fit. > > > > > > Some decisions that have already been made: > > > Futon.Next will be a single page couchapp. > > > > > > > > Using node.js seems to be at odds with having a single-page CouchApp? > > > > Also, please don't build this on top of node.js. I would consider it a > > regression if I have to use another application server along side > > CouchDB just to be able to use a nice CouchDB frontend. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Dirkjan
