It's been 2 months since the last release. Let's do a 0.22 release first with the bug fixes and improvements. After the release merge the require branch into trunk and document how to migrate existing installations.
Jasha On 1 July 2013 16:38, Matt Franklin <[email protected]> wrote: > IMO, latter; but, I would allow 72 hrs for lazy consensus review. > > Other opinions? > > On Monday, July 1, 2013, Erin Noe-Payne wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > The require.js branch is nearing completion, and I expect it will be > > ready to bring back into trunk within the next day or two. Should the > > merge be submitted as a patch through the review board, or should I > > just go ahead with it when it is ready, and provide an 0.21 -> 0.22 > > guide? > > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Erin Noe-Payne > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hey all, just to be clear since Dan's patch created a bit of confusion > > > - I created a "require" branch for this task. Since this is a pretty > > > broad change I felt we needed a branch to collaborate and complete the > > > changes. I am expecting a number of patches to be submitted against it > > > in the next couple weeks. > > > > > > Let me know if there are any concerns. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Matt Franklin < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:28 AM, Erin Noe-Payne < > > [email protected] > > >>> >wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > Specifically, the idea of require js is to take all references off > of > > >>> > the global namespace and to build out and resolve a dependency tree > > >>> > for your client side code. So if we made it optional, then someone > > >>> > who wanted to take advantage of the feature would need to overlay > any > > >>> > place where there is a reference to the global rave object. That > > >>> > includes jsps where there is a script block that uses rave.*, and > > wrap > > >>> > that in a require block. You would also need to overlay the java > > class > > >>> > that inserts rave.registerWidget(...) onto the page and wrap those > in > > >>> > require blocks. Also any jsp that has an onclick="rave.*" event > > >>> > handler, those would need to be moved to jquery bindings and > wrapped > > >>> > in require blocks. Once you had that you would overlay the > > >>> > rave_script.js tag so that instead of link all the scripts, you > just > > >>> > reference require.js with a data-main attribute pointing to your > > >>> > bootstrapping script. (See http://requirejs.org/docs/start.html). > > >>> > > > >>> > If instead we make a breaking change, then we would do all of the > > >>> > above work on trunk. An implementer who wanted to go to 0.22 would > > >>> > then be responsible for updating their scripts to be written as AMD > > >>> > modules (http://requirejs.org/docs/api.html#define). The script is > > >>> > wrapped in a require block, remove all references to global > namespace > > >>> > objects and instead require those in. Any additional third party > > >>> > scripts you use will need to be added to the require config > > >>> > (http://requirejs.org/docs/api.html#jsfiles). > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> Thanks Erin, my gut says if we make it optional no one (but maybe > > Mitre) > > >>> would use it in 0.22 due to the complexity of enabling it. Making it > > >>> optional is a breaking change but it sounds like it's a manageable > > amount > > >>> of work on implementors. I'll stick by my position that I'm ok with > > making > > >>> it required in 0.22 since it will be breaking eventually and the > > optional > > >>> track won't help get people prepared (just cause extra work). > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> +1 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> > > >>> Chris > > >>> > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Chris Geer <[email protected] > > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > What would be required exactly? > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On Tuesday, June 18, 2013, Erin Noe-Payne wrote: > > >>> > > > > >>> > >> If we make it optional, we will basically be conditionally AMD > > >>> > >> defining the rave js, and to actually use require it would be on > > an > > >>> > >> implementer to overlay every file that has script tags or inline > > >>> > >> "onclick" events. In other words it would be a big pain and not > > really > > >>> >
