Actually thinking about this further, i'm not so sure stripping out DojoX would be a good idea. DojoX has a lot features, and i realize we aren't using them now. But thinking about it the process of stripping down DojoX to just the components in Monitoring might be a maintenance nightmare. Taking a deeper look, there are a lot of dependencies and trails that you have to follow in the js files to completely separate out functioning pieces of dojox. In addition, if anyone were to add a another dojox feature, we'd have to follow suite with stripping out that component exclusively to achieve a small package size. Thoughts?
-Joseph Leong On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Joseph Leong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jason, > > I agree with that approach. The widget and other components are the > mainstream features. In efforts to reducing the size and to support the > monitoring features , i don't see why not just leave the charting features. > Does anyone else see a problem with this? > > -Joseph Leong > > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Jason Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Joe, >> >> Is it possible to pull in just the dojox charting features? I think the >> main driving factor of this is to drop dojox as that is 80% of the weight >> that would be dropped. If we can't keep just the charting features, then >> we're going to have to keep all of dojox or change how the monitoring plugin >> draws the graphs (I assume that's what it's used for). >> >> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Joseph Leong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Shrey, >>> >>> I think that makes a lot of sense, especially with the tests and demos. >>> My only comment is i believe the monitoring plugin may use some of the DojoX >>> charting features. However, after doing some research with dojo and AG >>> regarding the 0.4->1.1.1 conversion i think that was the only plugin with >>> dojox issues. Other than that, great idea on reducing the dojo footprint. >>> >>> -Joseph Leong >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Lin Sun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, what you propose makes sense to me. Can you suggest the best way >>>> to achieve this, possibly in a JIRA with a patch? >>>> >>>> Thanks, Lin >>>> >>>> On 6/26/08, Shrey Banga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> > Hi all, >>>> > >>>> > I've been working on the EAR PlanCreator and I've observed that dojo >>>> is >>>> > shipped with all the demos, tests and experimental widgets in place, >>>> causing >>>> > the folder to be about 12.8 MB on the expanded server (2.2-SNAPSHOT). >>>> > Looking at the various folders, I think we can achieve significant >>>> > reduction in the dojo footprint and eventually of the server itself by >>>> > removing the following components: >>>> > dojo/tests - 579 KB >>>> > dijit/tests - 551 KB >>>> > dijit/demos - 909 KB >>>> > dojox - 6.82 MB >>>> > >>>> > From a geronimo user's perspective, the tests suite is not of much use >>>> as >>>> > they are meant to test the widgets provided by dojo itself which can >>>> be >>>> > tested by separately downloading the given release instead of shipping >>>> it >>>> > with the server. Similarly, the demos, which are used to exhibit >>>> dojo's >>>> > capabilities, can be run directly from dojo's website or downloaded >>>> and run >>>> > locally without the server. Also, people trying to learn from the >>>> demos tend >>>> > to use the css provided for the purpose of the demo, which is not >>>> > recommended. >>>> > My rationale for removing the dojox is that these are marked as >>>> > experimental by the dojo community and although some components are >>>> used >>>> > often, keeping 6.8 MBs of code that is still experimental does not >>>> make >>>> > sense. It is better to trust the dojo community to shift components >>>> from >>>> > experimental to stable areas and then use them in further releases. >>>> > >>>> > Removing the stated components frees up about 8.7 MBs of space on the >>>> > expanded server, which is huge for a javascript library. Since a >>>> Geronimo >>>> > user can still include these components into his/her webapp we're not >>>> really >>>> > stopping them from using these components, only transferring the >>>> overhead of >>>> > using the lesser used components onto the user. >>>> > -- >>>> > Shrey Banga >>>> > Bachelor of Technology, III year >>>> > Department of Electrical Engineering >>>> > Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> ~Jason Warner > > >
