You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com> on 2009/07/17 01:20:38 UTC
Re: Which dojo?... and which dwr
On Jul 16, 2009, at 7:42 AM, Rex Wang wrote:
> I opened a jira https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4750
> to upload my patches, please see my comment there.
I applied these patches and it looks to me as if the stuff is pretty
much working but the trees lack icons at the beginnings of lines (to
show the tree structure). Could you investigate if we left out
some .gifs or something like that?
I thought we were done but realized we also still have dwr to deal
with. Could someone take a look at what happens? I think all that is
needed is to edit the root pom
<dependency>
<groupId>org.directwebremoting</groupId>
<artifactId>dwr</artifactId>
<version>2.0.5</version>
</dependency>
to
<dependency>
<groupId>org.directwebremoting</groupId>
<artifactId>dwr</artifactId>
<version>3.0.M1</version>
</dependency>
I opened GERONIMO-4753 for this one.
thanks!
david jencks
> -Rex
>
> 2009/7/16 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
>
> On Jul 16, 2009, at 12:04 AM, Rex Wang wrote:
>
>> yes, the size of two dojo.js is very different. I guess we should
>> first build the checked out codes. I am looking into the
>> buildscripts of it, but can not make a build successfully:-(, still
>> investigating...
>
> I worried about how much time it would take to figure out the build
> and decided that at least if the dojo.js was the only file needed we
> should just put the "compiled" version in svn
>
> Even though we need more I think it may well be worthwhile to save
> time and just put everything in svn that we need. Either that or
> the compiled dojo.js (as I did already) and fish the src/ files out
> of dojo svn.
>
> Remember .... this is hopefully a short-term dependency.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>>
>> -Rex
>>
>> 2009/7/16 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
>>
>> On Jul 15, 2009, at 7:47 PM, Rex Wang wrote:
>>
>>> I think the main reason why the new war has the different
>>> structure with the old one is:
>>> in the pom.xml of ext\trunk\geronimo-dojo-0.4.3, only check out
>>> the files in "src" to target/resource
>>> <execution>
>>> <id>checkout</id>
>>> <phase>generate-resources</phase>
>>> <goals>
>>> <goal>checkout</goal>
>>> </goals>
>>> <configuration>
>>> <checkoutDirectory>${project.basedir}/
>>> target/resources</checkoutDirectory>
>>> <connectionUrl>scm:svn:http://svn.dojotoolkit.org/src/tags/release-0.4.3/src/
>>> </connectionUrl>
>>> </configuration>
>>> </execution>
>>>
>>> I just tried "scm:svn:http://svn.dojotoolkit.org/src/tags/release-0.4.3/
>>> ", and the JMX and LDAP portlet seems working correctly, but the
>>> other three still have some problems to show the tree.
>>
>> I couldn't figure out what the dojo build.xml or build shell
>> scripts were doing, but it looked to me like the dojo.js in our war
>> file was really different from the dojo.js in svn. I was hoping
>> that only the dojo.js was actually used.... but obviously I was
>> wrong.
>>
>> Unless you can figure out a better svn-checkout-from-dojo solution
>> I think I'd try putting all the dojo files we need into src/main/
>> resources in the externals project. I can do this pretty easily,
>> probably more easily than from a patch.... let me know.
>>
>> thanks
>> david jencks
>>
>>>
>>> -Rex
>>>
>>> 2009/7/16 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
>>>
>>> On Jul 15, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Rex Wang wrote:
>>>
>>>> tried it.
>>>>
>>>> 1.
>>>> svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
>>>> mvn clean install
>>>> success!
>>>>
>>>> 2.
>>>> modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff
>>>> the patch in attachment shows the modification.
>>>> build successfully
>>>>
>>>> 3.
>>>> I did not build the entire server, but just remove the old one,
>>>> and install the new one.
>>>> I believe only the debug-views portlets use this legacy dojo,
>>>> because when I stop the dojo-legacy-tomcat plugin, only the
>>>> debugviews-console-tomcat web project stopped autoly. and I also
>>>> searched all the jsps underneath plugins folder in the server
>>>> build tree, only show the ones from debugviews holding reference
>>>> to "/dojo/0.4/dojo.js"
>>>>
>>>> results:
>>>> Unfortunately, the debugviews portlet don't display corretly...
>>>>
>>>> I make some screen shot. Shall we open a jira for this so that I
>>>> can upload them, which apparently shows dojo not work correctly?
>>>
>>> Or we could try to fix them :-)
>>>
>>> I looked at the two war files and they are different and I wonder
>>> what we actually use.
>>>
>>> old war (geronimo-dojo-legacy):
>>> -rw-r--r-- 151841 15-May-2007 02:11:02 dojo.js
>>> -rw-r--r-- 326567 15-May-2007 02:11:04
>>> dojo.js.uncompressed.js
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1170 15-May-2007 02:06:02 flash6_gateway.swf
>>> -rw-r--r-- 2364 15-May-2007 02:06:02 iframe_history.html
>>> -rw-r--r-- 11346 15-May-2007 02:06:02 LICENSE
>>> -rw-r--r-- 13133 14-Jul-2009 15:01:02 META-INF/LICENSE
>>> -rw-r--r-- 587 14-Jul-2009 15:01:02 META-INF/NOTICE
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1609 15-May-2007 02:11:32 src/a11y.js
>>> ......
>>> everything else is under src/
>>>
>>> new war (geronimo-dojo-0.4.3):
>>> just the contents of src from geronimo-dojo-legacy.
>>>
>>> So what do we actually use here? if its just dojo.js we can
>>> shrink it by leaving out the uncompressed.js and all the little
>>> files. If its just the little files under src we can use the new
>>> war and change the references to leave out the "src/" bit. Maybe
>>> I can come up with an alternate profile to build a war with just
>>> dojo.js in it??
>>>
>>> wishing I understood javascript delivery even a little bit...
>>> david jencks
>>>
>>>>
>>>> HTH
>>>> Rex.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2009/7/15 Rex Wang <rw...@gmail.com>
>>>> I'd like to try it :-)
>>>> -Rex
>>>>
>>>> 2009/7/15 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
>>>>
>>>> Jay -- many thanks for trying out the patch and committing it.
>>>>
>>>> I think the last artifact in our svn repo is the dojo 0.4.3. I
>>>> can't find it released anywhere but the source code is in a handy
>>>> svn repo. I cooked up a modification of our war-packaging for it
>>>> that uses the maven scm plugin to check out the source so it can
>>>> be packaged easily. I wonder if someone could try this out and
>>>> see if it works?
>>>>
>>>> -- check out new war project and build it
>>>> svn co https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/trunk/geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
>>>> cd geronimo-dojo-0.4.3
>>>> mvn clean install
>>>>
>>>> -- modify the plugins/dojo-legacy stuff so that
>>>> geronimo-dojo-legacy is not built
>>>> the dojo-legacy-jetty and dojo-legacy-tomcat plugins use the
>>>> geronimo-dojo-0.4.3-1.0-SNAPSHOT war file instead of the geronimo-
>>>> dojo-legacy war.
>>>>
>>>> -- build the server and see if the parts that use the legacy dojo
>>>> still work (debug views??? I'm not sure)
>>>>
>>>> many thanks
>>>> david jencks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 10, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 9, 2009, at 5:59 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Jay D. McHugh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey David,
>>>>
>>>> I'm starting to take a look at it today.
>>>>
>>>> They have a 1.3.1 version out - any objections to me switching
>>>> the patch
>>>> to use it?
>>>>
>>>> Not at all -- I just thought I'd start small since usually I
>>>> change 18 things at once and then can't tell what change broke
>>>> what feature :-)
>>>>
>>>> I think kevan mentioned offline he might take a look also. I
>>>> think I've been running locally with this patch for a couple
>>>> weeks and haven't seen any admin console problems, but that
>>>> doesn't mean much one way or another.
>>>>
>>>> I built with the patch and ran testsuite on Jetty. Everything
>>>> looked good to me (except for a corba-testsuite test that hung).
>>>>
>>>> Jay,
>>>> If you can test with the latest Dojo version and things look good
>>>> to you, I'd say go ahead and apply the updates.
>>>>
>>>> --kevan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <dojo-legacy.patch>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>