You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@aurora.apache.org by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> on 2014/03/27 21:39:50 UTC
[DISCUSS] Javascript dependencies location and bower
Currently the javascript dependencies we use within our source are
committed in three locations, this is the only bundled source type we
included within our source tree and currently we are required to maintain
each in the LICENSE file.
To help simplify managing the LICENSE file I would like to propose
1. Move all javascript dependencies into 3rdparty/javascript/ to simplify
tracking of these within the LICENSE file. (I think this should be the
initial approach and look into #2 if we want to introduce npm as a build
dependency)
2. We remove all javascript dependencies from the source tree and use bower
to handle these dependencies. As part of the initial build process we would
then check for npm and install the javascript components.
Thoughts?
-Jake
Re: [DISCUSS] Javascript dependencies location and bower
Posted by Suman Karumuri <ma...@apache.org>.
Thanks Jake. Will take a look once I am done with the UI refactor.
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
> They are
>
> src/main/python/apache/thermos/observer/http/assets/
> jquery.js, jquery.pailer.js, mootools-core.js, observer.js
>
> src/main/resources/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/http/assets/datatables
>
> 3rdparty/javascript/bower_components/
> angular.js, bootstrap.css, jquery, smart-table
>
> I've taken care of the files in 3rdparty and we are not blocked by this for
> the first release, i'll file a ticket and add the licenses for the
> remaining js dependency in src/ to the LICENSE file so its not an issue,
> once we refactor the ui and remove them from the source or switch to #2 we
> can clean up the LICENSE file.
>
> -Jake
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Suman Karumuri <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> What are the 3 locations you speak of? With the UI refactor work, most
>> of the dependencies in src/ for scheduler will be removed. If you can
>> file me a ticket with the issues you are facing, I can make sure that
>> #1 happens.
>>
>> We should definitely revisit #2 once #1 is done.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Currently the javascript dependencies we use within our source are
>> > committed in three locations, this is the only bundled source type we
>> > included within our source tree and currently we are required to maintain
>> > each in the LICENSE file.
>> >
>> > To help simplify managing the LICENSE file I would like to propose
>> >
>> > 1. Move all javascript dependencies into 3rdparty/javascript/ to simplify
>> > tracking of these within the LICENSE file. (I think this should be the
>> > initial approach and look into #2 if we want to introduce npm as a build
>> > dependency)
>> >
>> > 2. We remove all javascript dependencies from the source tree and use
>> bower
>> > to handle these dependencies. As part of the initial build process we
>> would
>> > then check for npm and install the javascript components.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > -Jake
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Javascript dependencies location and bower
Posted by Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org>.
They are
src/main/python/apache/thermos/observer/http/assets/
jquery.js, jquery.pailer.js, mootools-core.js, observer.js
src/main/resources/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/http/assets/datatables
3rdparty/javascript/bower_components/
angular.js, bootstrap.css, jquery, smart-table
I've taken care of the files in 3rdparty and we are not blocked by this for
the first release, i'll file a ticket and add the licenses for the
remaining js dependency in src/ to the LICENSE file so its not an issue,
once we refactor the ui and remove them from the source or switch to #2 we
can clean up the LICENSE file.
-Jake
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Suman Karumuri <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> What are the 3 locations you speak of? With the UI refactor work, most
> of the dependencies in src/ for scheduler will be removed. If you can
> file me a ticket with the issues you are facing, I can make sure that
> #1 happens.
>
> We should definitely revisit #2 once #1 is done.
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Currently the javascript dependencies we use within our source are
> > committed in three locations, this is the only bundled source type we
> > included within our source tree and currently we are required to maintain
> > each in the LICENSE file.
> >
> > To help simplify managing the LICENSE file I would like to propose
> >
> > 1. Move all javascript dependencies into 3rdparty/javascript/ to simplify
> > tracking of these within the LICENSE file. (I think this should be the
> > initial approach and look into #2 if we want to introduce npm as a build
> > dependency)
> >
> > 2. We remove all javascript dependencies from the source tree and use
> bower
> > to handle these dependencies. As part of the initial build process we
> would
> > then check for npm and install the javascript components.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -Jake
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Javascript dependencies location and bower
Posted by Bill Farner <wf...@apache.org>.
I'm open to either approach. If we can install npm 'on-demand' like we do
with gradle and thrift, that probably makes sense. I vote for the route
that distracts us less to getting to the first release.
-=Bill
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Suman Karumuri <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> What are the 3 locations you speak of? With the UI refactor work, most
> of the dependencies in src/ for scheduler will be removed. If you can
> file me a ticket with the issues you are facing, I can make sure that
> #1 happens.
>
> We should definitely revisit #2 once #1 is done.
>
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Currently the javascript dependencies we use within our source are
> > committed in three locations, this is the only bundled source type we
> > included within our source tree and currently we are required to maintain
> > each in the LICENSE file.
> >
> > To help simplify managing the LICENSE file I would like to propose
> >
> > 1. Move all javascript dependencies into 3rdparty/javascript/ to simplify
> > tracking of these within the LICENSE file. (I think this should be the
> > initial approach and look into #2 if we want to introduce npm as a build
> > dependency)
> >
> > 2. We remove all javascript dependencies from the source tree and use
> bower
> > to handle these dependencies. As part of the initial build process we
> would
> > then check for npm and install the javascript components.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -Jake
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Javascript dependencies location and bower
Posted by Suman Karumuri <ma...@apache.org>.
What are the 3 locations you speak of? With the UI refactor work, most
of the dependencies in src/ for scheduler will be removed. If you can
file me a ticket with the issues you are facing, I can make sure that
#1 happens.
We should definitely revisit #2 once #1 is done.
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Jake Farrell <jf...@apache.org> wrote:
> Currently the javascript dependencies we use within our source are
> committed in three locations, this is the only bundled source type we
> included within our source tree and currently we are required to maintain
> each in the LICENSE file.
>
> To help simplify managing the LICENSE file I would like to propose
>
> 1. Move all javascript dependencies into 3rdparty/javascript/ to simplify
> tracking of these within the LICENSE file. (I think this should be the
> initial approach and look into #2 if we want to introduce npm as a build
> dependency)
>
> 2. We remove all javascript dependencies from the source tree and use bower
> to handle these dependencies. As part of the initial build process we would
> then check for npm and install the javascript components.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Jake