You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shindig.apache.org by Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> on 2012/05/31 16:04:44 UTC
Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
Currently the "default" Shindig builds are actually the ones with
generated .opt files.
The JS Closure compiler does not use the minified version because it
"cheats" the flow of getting the JS content =)
Take a look at ClosureJsCompiler.getJsContent. It wraps the incoming
JsUri with the new one that always return JsUri.isDebug to true that
forces the DefaultJsCompiler.getFeatureContent to call
FeatureResource.getDebugContent instead of FeatureResource.getContent.
Shindig builds usually run on CI so I am not sure if I would worry
about speed of the builds to build the minified JS files unless the
saving is large. Do you have the numbers of time saved by removing the
YUI compressor?
The JS Closure compile initial compile is slow before being cached for
every new requests and may not be suitable for some Shindig
deployments.
I would argue if your use the advanced compiler option than maybe
makes sense to use JS closure compiler to get smaller and more
optimized footprint of the JS files. But with just the simple option I
believe it does the same thing as the YUI compressor to generate the
minified version which basically defer creation of minified JS to
runtime rather than on build time.
The default JS closure compiler also not using a thread pool to run
the compilation, so if somehow you have 10 gadgets in page (like in
dashboard mode) and all of the use different combination of feature
requests you might ended up with 10 additional threads for initial
requests to be used JS closure compiler.
I apologize if I sounded like I want to maintain status quo about this
because thats really not what I was trying to do. I just want to make
sure we simplify something that really needs to be simplify.
We have tons of other things to worry about in Shindig =)
I'll let the others chime in on this issue too.
- Henry
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:31 AM, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the closure compiler will not use the pre-minified
> sources. All of the code runs through the compiler the first time...
> cached copies of the results are kept in ehcache.
> If you're not using closure, then yeah, you might want these pre-minified
> files. I suggest we move it out to another goal or something so that we
> can speed up the builds for the default state of shindig builds.
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 10:46 PM
> Subject: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> The JS compiler has initial cost for each different JS URL request if
> specific JS resource path had not been compiled before it loads into
> cache.
> So using the minified opt files may save the initial cost to compile the
> JS
> requests.
> I think having pre-minified option for the features JS file maybe options
> for some Shindig deployments.
>
> If we want to Change the YUI compressor to only run when building Java5
> profile it means that we also need to change the feature resource loader
> to
> not requesting for .opt files when debug flag is off to only run in Java5
> profile.
>
>
> - Henry
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi Henry,
>>
>> I'm not recommending that we remove YUI compressor until we remove
> support
>> for Java 5. If we ever do remove Java5 support, which I think would be
>> something to look at in the 3.0 timeframe, then I think we could safely
>> remove the YUI compressor as well. Until that time, I have no plans to
>> touch the YUI compressor. However, if we do think the only use case for
>> the YUI compressor is when building with Java 5, then an optimization
>> would be to only do the YUI compression when building the Java 5
> profile.
>>
>> Does anyone have specific use cases where YUI is being used outside of
> the
>> Java 5 builds?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Stanton
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>> Date: 05/31/2012 17:11
>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Dan, Stanton,
>>
>> Closure compiler is called in runtime whereas the YUI is used in compile
>> time when generating the jar. Not everyone use closure complier which
>> makes
>> the minified JS becomes the non debug version of the JS.
>>
>> Until we remove support for java5 pls keep the YUI compressor as part if
>> the build system.
>> I believe the generated jar size wouldn't matter much.
>>
>> BTW Typing in iPhone sucks so sorry for any typos :P
>>
>> -Henry
>>
>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
>>>
>>> Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
>>> profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we
>> will
>>> use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files.
> In
>>> a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features
> jar
>>> with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first
>> I
>>> thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
>>> java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a
> Java
>> 6
>>> build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to
> use
>>> these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
>>>
>>> In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5
>> versions
>>> of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if
>> no
>>> one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that
> Java
>> 7
>>> will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Stanton
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>>> Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
>>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
>>> resource loader is used.
>>>
>>> When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
>>> generate minified version of the JS.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
>>> and
>>>> it's enabled by default now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>>>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>>>> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>>>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>>>>
>>>> - Henry
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com>.
I'm pretty sure the closure compiler will not use the pre-minified
sources. All of the code runs through the compiler the first time...
cached copies of the results are kept in ehcache.
If you're not using closure, then yeah, you might want these pre-minified
files. I suggest we move it out to another goal or something so that we
can speed up the builds for the default state of shindig builds.
From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
Date: 05/31/2012 10:46 PM
Subject: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
The JS compiler has initial cost for each different JS URL request if
specific JS resource path had not been compiled before it loads into
cache.
So using the minified opt files may save the initial cost to compile the
JS
requests.
I think having pre-minified option for the features JS file maybe options
for some Shindig deployments.
If we want to Change the YUI compressor to only run when building Java5
profile it means that we also need to change the feature resource loader
to
not requesting for .opt files when debug flag is off to only run in Java5
profile.
- Henry
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com>
wrote:
> Hi Henry,
>
> I'm not recommending that we remove YUI compressor until we remove
support
> for Java 5. If we ever do remove Java5 support, which I think would be
> something to look at in the 3.0 timeframe, then I think we could safely
> remove the YUI compressor as well. Until that time, I have no plans to
> touch the YUI compressor. However, if we do think the only use case for
> the YUI compressor is when building with Java 5, then an optimization
> would be to only do the YUI compression when building the Java 5
profile.
>
> Does anyone have specific use cases where YUI is being used outside of
the
> Java 5 builds?
>
> Thanks,
> -Stanton
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 17:11
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> Hi Dan, Stanton,
>
> Closure compiler is called in runtime whereas the YUI is used in compile
> time when generating the jar. Not everyone use closure complier which
> makes
> the minified JS becomes the non debug version of the JS.
>
> Until we remove support for java5 pls keep the YUI compressor as part if
> the build system.
> I believe the generated jar size wouldn't matter much.
>
> BTW Typing in iPhone sucks so sorry for any typos :P
>
> -Henry
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
>>
>> Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
>> profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we
> will
>> use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files.
In
>> a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features
jar
>> with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first
> I
>> thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
>> java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a
Java
> 6
>> build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to
use
>> these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
>>
>> In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5
> versions
>> of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if
> no
>> one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that
Java
> 7
>> will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Stanton
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>> Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>
>>
>>
>> It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
>> resource loader is used.
>>
>> When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
>> generate minified version of the JS.
>>
>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
>> and
>>> it's enabled by default now.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>>> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>>>
>>> - Henry
>>>
>>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
The JS compiler has initial cost for each different JS URL request if
specific JS resource path had not been compiled before it loads into cache.
So using the minified opt files may save the initial cost to compile the JS
requests.
I think having pre-minified option for the features JS file maybe options
for some Shindig deployments.
If we want to Change the YUI compressor to only run when building Java5
profile it means that we also need to change the feature resource loader to
not requesting for .opt files when debug flag is off to only run in Java5
profile.
- Henry
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com>
wrote:
> Hi Henry,
>
> I'm not recommending that we remove YUI compressor until we remove support
> for Java 5. If we ever do remove Java5 support, which I think would be
> something to look at in the 3.0 timeframe, then I think we could safely
> remove the YUI compressor as well. Until that time, I have no plans to
> touch the YUI compressor. However, if we do think the only use case for
> the YUI compressor is when building with Java 5, then an optimization
> would be to only do the YUI compression when building the Java 5 profile.
>
> Does anyone have specific use cases where YUI is being used outside of the
> Java 5 builds?
>
> Thanks,
> -Stanton
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 17:11
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> Hi Dan, Stanton,
>
> Closure compiler is called in runtime whereas the YUI is used in compile
> time when generating the jar. Not everyone use closure complier which
> makes
> the minified JS becomes the non debug version of the JS.
>
> Until we remove support for java5 pls keep the YUI compressor as part if
> the build system.
> I believe the generated jar size wouldn't matter much.
>
> BTW Typing in iPhone sucks so sorry for any typos :P
>
> -Henry
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
>>
>> Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
>> profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we
> will
>> use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files. In
>> a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features jar
>> with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first
> I
>> thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
>> java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a Java
> 6
>> build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to use
>> these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
>>
>> In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5
> versions
>> of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if
> no
>> one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that Java
> 7
>> will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Stanton
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>> Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>
>>
>>
>> It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
>> resource loader is used.
>>
>> When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
>> generate minified version of the JS.
>>
>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
>> and
>>> it's enabled by default now.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>>> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>>>
>>> - Henry
>>>
>>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Henry,
I'm not recommending that we remove YUI compressor until we remove support
for Java 5. If we ever do remove Java5 support, which I think would be
something to look at in the 3.0 timeframe, then I think we could safely
remove the YUI compressor as well. Until that time, I have no plans to
touch the YUI compressor. However, if we do think the only use case for
the YUI compressor is when building with Java 5, then an optimization
would be to only do the YUI compression when building the Java 5 profile.
Does anyone have specific use cases where YUI is being used outside of the
Java 5 builds?
Thanks,
-Stanton
From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
Date: 05/31/2012 17:11
Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Hi Dan, Stanton,
Closure compiler is called in runtime whereas the YUI is used in compile
time when generating the jar. Not everyone use closure complier which
makes
the minified JS becomes the non debug version of the JS.
Until we remove support for java5 pls keep the YUI compressor as part if
the build system.
I believe the generated jar size wouldn't matter much.
BTW Typing in iPhone sucks so sorry for any typos :P
-Henry
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
>
> Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
> profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we
will
> use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files. In
> a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features jar
> with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first
I
> thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
> java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a Java
6
> build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to use
> these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
>
> In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5
versions
> of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if
no
> one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that Java
7
> will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
>
> Thanks,
> -Stanton
>
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
> resource loader is used.
>
> When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
> generate minified version of the JS.
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
> and
>> it's enabled by default now.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>>
>> - Henry
>>
>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dan, Stanton,
Closure compiler is called in runtime whereas the YUI is used in compile
time when generating the jar. Not everyone use closure complier which makes
the minified JS becomes the non debug version of the JS.
Until we remove support for java5 pls keep the YUI compressor as part if
the build system.
I believe the generated jar size wouldn't matter much.
BTW Typing in iPhone sucks so sorry for any typos :P
-Henry
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
>
> Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
> profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we will
> use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files. In
> a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features jar
> with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first I
> thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
> java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a Java 6
> build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to use
> these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
>
> In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5 versions
> of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if no
> one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that Java 7
> will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
>
> Thanks,
> -Stanton
>
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
> resource loader is used.
>
> When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
> generate minified version of the JS.
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
> and
>> it's enabled by default now.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
>> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
>> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>>
>>
>>
>> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>>
>> - Henry
>>
>> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Rich Thompson <ri...@us.ibm.com>.
I would suggest that things which are only needed at build time be
separated (BuildTools?). If the normal build isn't going to use the .opt
files, then that section of the build should be commented out (I would
leave it in place though to assist anyone who might be replacing the
closure compiler component). Overall, I do agree that having the normal
build generate files which the normal runtime will not use is bloat that
should be eliminated.
From: Stanton Sievers/Westford/IBM@Lotus
To: dev@shindig.apache.org,
Date: 05/31/2012 03:56 PM
Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we will
use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files. In
a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features jar
with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first I
thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a Java 6
build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to use
these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5 versions
of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if no
one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that Java 7
will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
Thanks,
-Stanton
From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
resource loader is used.
When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
generate minified version of the JS.
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
and
> it's enabled by default now.
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>
> - Henry
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Stanton Sievers <ss...@us.ibm.com>.
I talked to Dan offline about this a bit....
Generating the optimized files when building anything but the java5
profile is a bit of a waste because in a "normal" build of Shindig we will
use Closure to do simple optimizations and not these optimized files. In
a Java 6 build of Shindig we end up shipping the extras and features jar
with these extra optimized code in them that never gets used. At first I
thought it might make sense to only do the compression if building the
java 5 profile... but there's nothing stopping someone from using a Java 6
build of Shindig and injecting their own JsCompiler that may want to use
these optimized files. Does that seem like a valid use case?
In general, how much do we care about being able to build Java 5 versions
of Shindig? I think this might be something we can phase out in 3.0 if no
one has any objections. We should also simplify the builds so that Java 7
will work.... from what I've seen it doesn't work today.
Thanks,
-Stanton
From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
Date: 05/31/2012 15:46
Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
resource loader is used.
When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
generate minified version of the JS.
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought,
and
> it's enabled by default now.
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>
> - Henry
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
It's used to generate opt postfixed files for the JS files when dual
resource loader is used.
When features jar is generated the yui compressor plugin is called to
generate minified version of the JS.
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought, and
> it's enabled by default now.
>
>
>
> From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
> Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
> yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
>
>
>
> I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
>
> - Henry
>
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
>
>
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com>.
What are those used for? Closure works on the raw source I thought, and
it's enabled by default now.
From: Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
To: "dev@shindig.apache.org" <de...@shindig.apache.org>,
Date: 05/31/2012 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the
yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
- Henry
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?
Re: Does anyone use the compress goal and and the yuicompressor-maven-plugin?
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
I thought that's used to generate the .opt files for the JavaScript?
- Henry
On Thursday, May 31, 2012, Dan Dumont <dd...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> If not, can we remove it from the features and extras pom.xml?