rave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erin Noe-Payne <erin.noe.pa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Require.js in 0.22
Date Tue, 09 Jul 2013 14:35:45 GMT
Yes, I ran through some standard regression testing. Thanks for
updating docs, I'll try to put together the release today.

On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Matt Franklin <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Matt Franklin <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <erin.noe.payne@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I can probably find time to test and perform the release this week.
>>>
>>> If we could update the docs at
>>> http://rave.apache.org/release-process.html to reflect the he release
>>> scripts we have available at
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/rave/release-management/ that would
>>> be helpful to me. I performed the last release but only sort of
>>> remember how to do it. Ha...
>>>
>>
>> I will do this today
>>
>
> Finally updated.  Anyone check out functionality on the trunk?
>
>
>
>>
>> Also, I found a problem in the requirejs branch.  Apparently, the shindig
>> javascript is being pulled from the same host as the rave instance and not
>> the shindig host.  This means when I deploy Shindig to a different host,
>> any OpenSocial gadget fails to render.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Chris Geer <chris@cxtsoftware.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Matt Franklin <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <
>>> erin.noe.payne@gmail.com
>>> >> >wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > Also, to your comments Sean - I assume you are referring to 0.22
and
>>> >> > 0.23-SNAPSHOT?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > In general I don't like the idea of worrying about pushing breaking
>>> >> > changes into the trunk because of people relying on snapshot.
>>> >> > Production systems shouldn't be depending on nightly builds, right?
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Shouldn't & are are two different things.  Do any of you who would
>>> like to
>>> >> spin a release have time to validate trunk today?  If everything checks
>>> >> out, I am +1 for release and then merge this week.
>>> >>
>>> >> If trunk is not releasable though, I say lets delay a month and release
>>> >> with require js.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > If someone can do the release I'm definitely +1 for a release prior to
>>> > merge. There isn't much in there that is done but there are a couple
>>> good
>>> > bug fixes.
>>> >
>>> > Chris
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <
>>> erin.noe.payne@gmail.com
>>> >> >
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> > > Ok. Are we ready to release 0.22? I'm fine with release first,
but
>>> I'd
>>> >> > like
>>> >> > > to get require into trunk relatively soon so we can take advantage
>>> of
>>> >> it,
>>> >> > > and also so that we can keep the require, angular branches
and
>>> trunk
>>> >> all
>>> >> > > fairly in sync.
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > On Monday, July 1, 2013, Sean Cooper wrote:
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> +1
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> This will save anyone that is using 0.21 SNAPSHOT.  Release
0.22
>>> and
>>> >> > then
>>> >> > >> merge onto 0.22 SNAPSHOT
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> -Sean
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Jasha Joachimsthal
>>> >> > >> <jasha@apache.org>wrote:
>>> >> > >>
>>> >> > >> > 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 <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com>
>>> >> 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
>>> >> > >> > > > <erin.noe.payne@gmail.com> 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 <
>>> >> > >> > > m.ben.franklin@gmail.com>
>>> >> > >> > > > wrote:
>>> >> > >> > > > >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:25
AM, Chris Geer
>>> >> > >> > > > >> <chris@cxtsoftware.com
>>> >> > >> > >
>>> >> > >> > > > wrote:
>>> >> > >> > > > >>
>>> >> > >> > > > >>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:28
AM, Erin Noe-Payne <
>>> >> > >> > > > erin.noe.payne@gmail.com
>>> >> > >> > > > >>> >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
>>> >> > >> > > > >>>
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>>
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message