LedgerSMB / Bugs / #1182 Dojo Toolkit not up to date, minified

John Locke - 2014-07-28

For a long time, I've always built Dojo libraries using Dojo's build system to make a minified run-time. I just hadn't done this with Dojo's post 1.7 AMD syntax. Since then I have, so I just need to put together a package script and build this.

The output of the build does contain the full source tree, but it adds "layers" that have packed and aggregated copies of the modules we choose to build into the layer, making for a much faster load time in the browser, while not really decreasing the disk footprint.

My main question is whether we want to include the source at all. I'm thinking I'll add the main Dojo libraries as git submodules for the source file, create a layer file for the build, and add the "compiled" dojo build to the Ledger tree essentially where it is.

That way a clone of LSMB should get everything needed to run, but if you want to develop/rebuild the JS files, you'll need to pull in the git submodules (git submodule init; git submodule update).

Any objection to this approach?

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
- Robert James Clay - 2014-08-01
  
  On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 8:40 PM, John Locke freelock@users.sf.net wrote:
  
  My main question is whether we want to include the source at all. I'm thinking I'll add the
  main Dojo libraries as git submodules for the source file, create a layer file for the build,
  and add the "compiled" dojo build to the Ledger tree essentially where it is.
  
  Is there an actual requirement of some sort to have it embedded and
  distributed with LSMB? I'd rather it just use the standard packages
  already available. (Influenced, I'll admit, by that I work and
  develop on Debian and "convenience" copies of code are against
  policy.)
  
  --
  Robert J. Clay
  rjclay@gmail.com
  
  If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
  - John Locke - 2014-08-03
    
    Hi, Robert,
    
    Dojo runs entirely in the browser. There's no standard way I know of
    provisioning a JS library on a server to deliver to a browser in all web
    applications running on a server -- even if we could rely on a standard
    URL pattern for loading JS libraries, you still have the problem of
    providing known working versions across all the web applications
    potentially in use on a server. The only practical way of shipping JS
    for a web application is to either use a CDN (which introduces a 3rd
    party dependency and NOT something I would want to see in a sensitive
    application like LSMB) or bundle it in the app.
    
    With Dojo, there's also a build process akin to compiling -- it strips
    out whitespace, shortens variable names, packs it all into a much
    smaller footprint with many fewer http requests. To get the best result,
    you create a build containing only the widgets the specific application
    uses -- strike a balance between including what you use and excluding
    everything else.
    
    I'm proposing shipping the built copy of the code in our tarballs, and
    leaving out the full source (although the built copies do include a full
    source tree -- the builds are "layers" that can still pull in code if
    needed). And then include the actual source tree as a git submodule, so
    any contributor can pull it in to add to the build layer.
    
    Cheers,
    John
    
    On 08/01/2014 09:18 AM, Robert James Clay wrote:
    
    On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 8:40 PM, John Locke freelock@users.sf.net
    freelock@users.sf.net wrote:
    
    My main question is whether we want to include the source at all. I'm thinking I'll add the main Dojo libraries as git submodules for the source file, create a layer file for the build, and add the "compiled" dojo build to the Ledger tree essentially where it is.
    
    Is there an actual requirement of some sort to have it embedded and
    distributed with LSMB? I'd rather it just use the standard packages
    already available. (Influenced, I'll admit, by that I work and
    develop on Debian and "convenience" copies of code are against
    policy.)
    
    --
    Robert J. Clay
    rjclay@gmail.com
    
    [bugs:#1182] http://sourceforge.net/p/ledger-smb/bugs/1182 Dojo
    Toolkit not up to date, minified
    
    Status: open
    Group: 1.4
    Created: Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:35 AM UTC by John Locke
    Last Updated: Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:40 AM UTC
    Owner: John Locke
    
    From IRC:
    
    [09:42:46] btw; dojo?
    [09:42:55] <ehu> 1.4.0
    [09:43:22] <ehu> 1.4.0 uses dojo, not scriptaculous
    [09:46:31] ah. " Modular JavaScript toolkit" ?
    [09:48:04] <ehu> that's the one.
    [09:48:15] <ehu> Dojo Toolkit, I think it is by its full name.
    [09:49:07] I see that Debian has three packages for it. core,
    Digit, DojoX. v1.3 for squeeze. 1.7.2 for the rest..
    [09:49:39] haven't checked Ubuntu yet...
    [09:50:53] <ehu> I think we use parts of all of them.
    [09:51:00] <ehu> at least core and dijit I know for sure.
    [09:53:14] they're currently embedded?
    [09:53:40] <ehu> in 1.4? yes.
    [09:53:58] path?
    [09:55:40] <ehu> UI/lib/
    [09:56:01] <ehu> {dojo,dojox,dijit} (I think)
    [09:58:04] I see 'em now. Bit more complex than with
    scriptaculous, but I should be do the same thing. (adding to my ToDo
    list for it)
    [10:03:08] s/be do/be able to do/
    [10:15:08] <ehu> right. do you know if the version(s) shipped in
    Debian (and derivatives) will be the minified versions?
    [10:20:43] don't think so, but let me check...
    [10:25:56] scriptaculous isn't...
    [10:28:20] <ehu> ok. neither is ours, so there's no difference there.
    [10:28:26] <ehu> Dojo is pretty big.
    [10:28:35] <ehu> would be nice to have a minified version for that.
    [10:32:48] some 43Mb... (just installed in my jessie chroot)...
    [10:33:12] how much difference does it make, do you know?
    [10:42:29] and aren't there apache modules for that? an same
    for web servers?
    [10:42:48] <ehu> for dojo?
    [10:43:02] <ehu> I think Dojo is 190MB non-minified
    [10:43:10] <ehu> but I don't know where I got that from.
    [10:43:30] <ehu> it's not possible to replace it by web-server
    modules, no.
    [10:43:38] <ehu> it's a javascript library
    [10:43:49] <ehu> which helps to create applications in webpages.
    [10:45:46] mod_pagespeed, for instance. filter that auto
    minify the js libraries as they're downloaded the browser. Or so I
    understand...
    [10:47:44] or is it mod_minify? (more research needed...)
    [11:15:18] <ehu> mod_pagespeed, indeed.
    [11:15:27] <ehu>
    https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/module/filter-js-minify</ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu>
    
    Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
    https://sourceforge.net/p/ledger-smb/bugs/1182/
    https://sourceforge.net/p/ledger-smb/bugs/1182
    
    To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
    https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
    https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions
    
    Related
    
    Bugs: ~~#1182~~
    
    If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
    - Robert James Clay - 2014-09-03
      
      John,
      
      Sorry for the delay in my reply...
      
      On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, John Locke mail@freelock.com wrote:
      
      Dojo runs entirely in the browser. There's no standard way I know of
      provisioning a JS library on a server to deliver to a browser in all web
      applications running on a server -- even if we could rely on a standard URL
      pattern for loading JS libraries, you still have the problem of providing
      known working versions across all the web applications potentially in use on
      a server.
      
      That rather depends on the system being used... On Debian & its
      derivatives, for instance; standard JavaScript debian packages
      install to, and are made available from (at least for Apache),
      a sub-directory in /usr/share/javascript named after the package.
      
      Dojo v1.10 is what is now (as of 8/27) in Debian testing... There had been
      issue(s) with building the package but with the new version that
      apparently was resolved in favor of using nodejs for it.
      
      If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Chris Travers - 2014-08-27

This doesn't have to be distributed with ledgersmb given that some people may want to get it from the distro. I have no problem with the link being replaced by a symlink to a shared js location during packaging.

The question is what we want to install with the tarball. The reason for bundling dojo is that it gives us a little more control over what people get when they install from source. This decision was made based on security-minded reasoning but it isn't clear to me right now whether it is the right decision. It might be better to have a script which downloads and unpacks?

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Chris Travers - 2014-09-03

I will be looking into how to work better with debian packaging as well. I am assuming that symlinks to the debian install of dojo is either not acceptable or suboptimal. There may however be some difficulties because of the fact that we have some dojo widgets we have written.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
- Robert James Clay - 2014-09-03
  
  On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
  
  I will be looking into how to work better with debian packaging as well. I am
  assuming that symlinks to the debian install of dojo is either not acceptable
  or suboptimal.
  
  Why would that be?
  
  There may however be some difficulties because of the fact that we have some
  dojo widgets we have written.
  
  Well, how do they use dojo? (I'll admit I'm not very familiar with it yet..)
  
  If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
  - Chris Travers - 2014-09-04
    
    Why would that be?
    
    I don;t know if it adds to maintenance headaches of anything ever moves. However you can just drop the UI/lib/dojo and instead symlink it to /usr/share/javascript if you want (that would be easiest and not require any changes to our code).
    
    I think you'd want to make ledgersmb dependent on libjs-dojo-core libjs-dojo-dijit libjs-dojo-dojox
    
    If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Anonymous - 2015-06-23

In sofar as that this item was related to creating Debian packages, I think this item has been resolved: Debian replaces the embedded Dojo version with a link to Dojo from the Debian packages.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Anonymous - 2015-06-23

status: open --> pending-fixed

Version: --> 1.2
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
- Chris Travers - 2015-06-24
  
  yeah, let's close it for now.
  
  I think we do need a build system but that's another topic.
  
  On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Erik Huelsmann ehuelsmann@users.sf.net wrote:
  
  status: open --> pending-fixed
  Version: --> 1.2
  Comment:
  
  The debian issue being fixed, I wonder if we should leave this open much
  longer.
  
  The item John reports isn't easy to fix: we don't have a build, so we don't
  have a good time to introduce the minification step. I'm guessing that
  what's left here should be taken out and moved to "development tasks" -- the
  creation of a build system/step.
  
  [bugs:#1182] Dojo Toolkit not up to date, minified
  
  Status: pending-fixed
  Group: 1.4
  Created: Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:35 AM UTC by John Locke
  Last Updated: Tue Jun 23, 2015 09:15 PM UTC
  Owner: John Locke
  
  From IRC:
  
  [09:42:46] <jame> btw; dojo?
  [09:42:55] <ehu> 1.4.0
  [09:43:22] <ehu> 1.4.0 uses dojo, not scriptaculous
  [09:46:31] <jame> ah. " Modular JavaScript toolkit" ?
  [09:48:04] <ehu> that's the one.
  [09:48:15] <ehu> Dojo Toolkit, I think it is by its full name.
  [09:49:07] <jame> I see that Debian has three packages for it. core, Digit,
  DojoX. v1.3 for squeeze. 1.7.2 for the rest..
  [09:49:39] <jame> haven't checked Ubuntu yet...
  [09:50:53] <ehu> I think we use parts of all of them.
  [09:51:00] <ehu> at least core and dijit I know for sure.
  [09:53:14] <jame> they're currently embedded?
  [09:53:40] <ehu> in 1.4? yes.
  [09:53:58] <jame> path?
  [09:55:40] <ehu> UI/lib/
  [09:56:01] <ehu> {dojo,dojox,dijit} (I think)
  [09:58:04] <jame> I see 'em now. Bit more complex than with scriptaculous,
  but I should be do the same thing. (adding to my ToDo list for it)
  [10:03:08] <jame> s/be do/be able to do/
  [10:15:08] <ehu> right. do you know if the version(s) shipped in Debian (and
  derivatives) will be the minified versions?
  [10:20:43] <jame> don't think so, but let me check...
  [10:25:56] <jame> scriptaculous isn't...
  [10:28:20] <ehu> ok. neither is ours, so there's no difference there.
  [10:28:26] <ehu> Dojo is pretty big.
  [10:28:35] <ehu> would be nice to have a minified version for that.
  [10:32:48] <jame> some 43Mb... (just installed in my jessie chroot)...
  [10:33:12] <jame> how much difference does it make, do you know?
  [10:42:29] <jame> and aren't there apache modules for that? an same for web
  servers?
  [10:42:48] <ehu> for dojo?
  [10:43:02] <ehu> I think Dojo is 190MB non-minified
  [10:43:10] <ehu> but I don't know where I got that from.
  [10:43:30] <ehu> it's not possible to replace it by web-server modules, no.
  [10:43:38] <ehu> it's a javascript library
  [10:43:49] <ehu> which helps to create applications in webpages.
  [10:45:46] <jame> mod_pagespeed, for instance. filter that auto minify the
  js libraries as they're downloaded the browser. Or so I understand...
  [10:47:44] <jame> or is it mod_minify? (more research needed...)
  [11:15:18] <ehu> mod_pagespeed, indeed.
  [11:15:27] <ehu>
  https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/module/filter-js-minify</ehu></ehu></jame></jame></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></ehu></jame></jame></jame></ehu></ehu></ehu></jame></jame></ehu></jame></jame></ehu></ehu></jame></ehu></jame></ehu></ehu></jame></jame></ehu></ehu></jame></ehu></ehu></jame>
  
  Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
  https://sourceforge.net/p/ledger-smb/bugs/1182/
  
  To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
  https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
  
  Related
  
  Bugs: ~~#1182~~
  
  If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Anonymous - 2015-06-23

The debian issue being fixed, I wonder if we should leave this open much longer.

The item John reports isn't easy to fix: we don't have a build, so we don't have a good time to introduce the minification step. I'm guessing that what's left here should be taken out and moved to "development tasks" -- the creation of a build system/step.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Robert James Clay - 2015-06-25

For the Debian package builds: attempting to set up the sym links like was done for the scriptaculous javascript libraries has not been working, because things like the .js.uncompressed.js files are still not getting sym linked and are still ending up causing lintian issues like the following:

P: ledgersmb source: source-contains-prebuilt-javascript-object UI/lib/dojo/dojox/gfx.js mean line length is about 7748 characters
O: ledgersmb source: source-is-missing UI/lib/dojo/dojox/gfx.js

What I'm trying for now is repacking the source archive with the embedded dojo directories excluded altogether, and having the packaging install the three sym links to them as installed by their debian packages. (If that works well enough; I'll just need to set up a process that can download a source archive, check the pgp signature of the archive, and then repack it without the dojo directories.)

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Anonymous - 2015-08-09

Hi Jame,

Can we close this? Been a long time again...

Also, I'd rather remove the dependencies from our tree/archive entirely, if you're telling me the debian packaging process currently suffers from the fact that we currently have them in our tree/package.

(Maybe we need to add a separate package or a package for other download purposes with the dependencies, but if we add dojo, then why don't we add TeX or any of the other required Perl packages?)

Regards,

Erik.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Robert James Clay - 2015-08-10

Can we close this? Been a long time again...

Yes, I think so.

Also, I'd rather remove the dependencies from our tree/archive entirely,

Well, I agree that's the best way to go.

if you're telling me the debian packaging process currently suffers from the fact that we currently have them in our tree/package.

OTH; it's not that hard to create a debian 'orig' source archive without the problem files, though it's not as easy as simply renaming it.

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Chris Travers - 2015-10-17

Due to the need for a longer-term permanent solution, moving this to github

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Chris Travers - 2015-10-17

status: pending-fixed --> closed-duplicate
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Chris Travers - 2015-10-17

https://github.com/ledgersmb/LedgerSMB/issues/904

If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:

Dojo Toolkit not up to date, minified

Building High Quality ERP and Accounting Software for SMB & SME

Group

Searches

Help

#1182 Dojo Toolkit not up to date, minified

Related

Discussion

Related

Related