On Thu Oct 10 02:22 PM, David Bruant wrote: > Among other benefits [1]: > "pushed resources are cached individually by the browser and can be reused > across many pages" > => It's not clear this can happen with an asset.zip >
Opposite benefit of using assets.zip, only a single cache entry to lookup. You should be able to re-use assets.zip across pages. Imagine having 20 images that never change in 1 year. The browser will lookup 20 cache entries, why? Use sprites? A common use case would be bundle resources that rarely change in a single file. > We can discuss the deployment aspects of HTTP 2 and whether Generic Bundling > as proposed can provide benefits before HTTP 2 is fully deployed, but I feel > the bottleneck will be the server-side > engineering to bundle the resources and this work is equivalent for both HTTP > 2 and the proposed Generic Bundling. > So HTTP 2 wins? > It will be useful, I think of it as a win for files that change frequently. Another benefit of bundles not solved by HTTP 2: theming. http://jquery.com/themes/blue.zip http://jquery.com/themes/red.zip It would make distribution of themes much simpler. If developers point to the same 'cached' bundle from a cdn, that's a win for less internet traffic. The pattern could be: <link rel="loader" type="application/zip" href="http://jquery.com/themes/blue.zip"; ref="theme"> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="buttons.css" ref="theme"> For backwards compatibility, you would have buttons.css available on your own the server. I think of bundling as better way of distributing applications (www or packaged), not only the performance benefits of pipelining stuff in a single request. _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
