Menu
▾
▴
dynapi-dev
|
From: Raymond I. <xw...@ya...> - 2003-04-16 03:44:19
|
Hello Everyone, I've managed to separate the packages from the dynapi.js file. They're now stored inside the ext/packages.js file. Please see the attached zip file for the updates. This change will make it easier for users to add or remove class libraries without having to modify dynapi.js or load a separate js file. They can just make all their changes to the packages.js file. It also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more easier. What do you think? Are these changes welcomed? -- Raymond Irving __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com |
|
From: Raymond I. <xw...@ya...> - 2003-04-16 03:59:50
Attachments:
dynapi3x.zip
|
--- Raymond Irving <xw...@ya...> wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > I've managed to separate the packages from the > dynapi.js file. They're now stored inside the > ext/packages.js file. Please see the attached zip > file > for the updates. > > This change will make it easier for users to add or > remove class libraries without having to modify > dynapi.js or load a separate js file. They can just > make all their changes to the packages.js file. It > also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more easier. > > What do you think? Are these changes welcomed? > > -- > Raymond Irving > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo > http://search.yahoo.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > Dyn...@li... > http://www.mail-archive.com/dyn...@li.../ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com |
|
From: Dan W. <da...@wi...> - 2003-04-16 10:40:41
|
On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 22:59, Raymond Irving wrote: > It also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more easier. How? Wouldn't the user still have to update the new packages.js file? Or even, between upgrades, a change in one of the widgets, or an additional one, all these examples would need a new packages.js i would think. -- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> |
|
From: Raymond I. <xw...@ya...> - 2003-04-16 13:50:06
|
--- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> wrote: > On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 22:59, Raymond Irving wrote: > > It also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more easier. > How? Wouldn't the user still have to update the new > packages.js file? Or > even, between upgrades, a change in one of the > widgets, or an additional > one, all these examples would need a new packages.js > i would think. With this method the user now controls the packages separately from the dynapi.js file. This will be very useful in production environments were customized packages are needed. The user can now freely update the dynapi.js file without having to worry about packages been overwritten. -- Raymond Irving > -- > Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > Dyn...@li... > http://www.mail-archive.com/dyn...@li.../ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com |
|
From: Dan W. <da...@wi...> - 2003-04-16 21:23:23
|
On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 08:50, Raymond Irving wrote: > --- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> wrote: > > On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 22:59, Raymond Irving wrote: > > > It also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more easier. > > How? Wouldn't the user still have to update the new > > packages.js file? Or > > even, between upgrades, a change in one of the > > widgets, or an additional > > one, all these examples would need a new packages.js > > i would think. > > With this method the user now controls the packages > separately from the dynapi.js file. This will be very > useful in production environments were customized > packages are needed. The user can now freely update > the dynapi.js file without having to worry about > packages been overwritten. Except they would still have to worry about the packages.js file being overwritten, right? -- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> |
|
From: Raymond I. <xw...@ya...> - 2003-04-16 23:15:28
|
--- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> wrote: > On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 08:50, Raymond Irving wrote: > > --- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 22:59, Raymond Irving > wrote: > > > > It also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more > easier. > > > How? Wouldn't the user still have to update the > new > > > packages.js file? Or > > > even, between upgrades, a change in one of the > > > widgets, or an additional > > > one, all these examples would need a new > packages.js > > > i would think. > > > > With this method the user now controls the > packages > > separately from the dynapi.js file. This will be > very > > useful in production environments were customized > > packages are needed. The user can now freely > update > > the dynapi.js file without having to worry about > > packages been overwritten. > Except they would still have to worry about the > packages.js file being > overwritten, right? Yes, but even if they do, it's easier for them to just simply restore their packages.js and not worry about any code changes, as oppose to them restoring or modifying the dynapi.js, which might have some critical changes. Besides that it makes the dynapi.js looks smaller :) Agree? Should we implement this package feature? Or is it six-of-one and half-dozen of the other? -- Raymond Irving > -- > Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search.yahoo.com |
|
From: Benoit M. <mar...@ma...> - 2003-04-17 00:52:38
|
I think we should, even if it doesn't change the work you have to do, it's less "scary" to deal with merging changes in a separate file rather than in dynapi.js, My 2 cents, Benoit On Wednesday, April 16, 2003, at 04:15 PM, Raymond Irving wrote: > > --- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> wrote: >> On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 08:50, Raymond Irving wrote: >>> --- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> wrote: >>>> On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 22:59, Raymond Irving >> wrote: >>>>> It also makes upgrading dynapi a lot more >> easier. >>>> How? Wouldn't the user still have to update the >> new >>>> packages.js file? Or >>>> even, between upgrades, a change in one of the >>>> widgets, or an additional >>>> one, all these examples would need a new >> packages.js >>>> i would think. >>> >>> With this method the user now controls the >> packages >>> separately from the dynapi.js file. This will be >> very >>> useful in production environments were customized >>> packages are needed. The user can now freely >> update >>> the dynapi.js file without having to worry about >>> packages been overwritten. >> Except they would still have to worry about the >> packages.js file being >> overwritten, right? > > Yes, but even if they do, it's easier for them to just > simply restore their packages.js and not worry about > any code changes, as oppose to them restoring or > modifying the dynapi.js, which might have some > critical changes. > > Besides that it makes the dynapi.js looks smaller :) > > Agree? Should we implement this package feature? Or is > it six-of-one and half-dozen of the other? > > -- > Raymond Irving > > >> -- >> Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> >> > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo > http://search.yahoo.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > Dyn...@li... > http://www.mail-archive.com/dyn...@li.../ > |
|
From: Dan W. <da...@wi...> - 2003-04-17 02:33:21
|
On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 19:31, Benoit Marchant wrote: > I think we should, even if it doesn't change the work you have to do, > it's less "scary" to deal with merging changes in a separate file > rather than in dynapi.js, ok, that makes sense > > My 2 cents, > > Benoit -- Dan Willemsen <da...@wi...> |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X