[aerogear-dev] AeroGear.js without jQuery Discussion

[Lucas Holmquist]

On Mar 24, 2014, at 10:10 AM, tolis emmanouilidis <tolisemm at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2014-03-24 15:39 GMT+02:00 Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com> wrote:
>> I agree that it would be nice to implement AGJS-70 (Investigate removing jQuery requirement). Meanwhile, there is an open source project on GitHub that claims to offer a custom builder for jQuery in order to include only the modules needed [1] [2]. I haven't tried it yet but maybe we could create a custom jQuery build which includes only the parts currently needed in AeroGear. This would mean a smaller size of the jQuery dependency. 
> 
> The AG lib depends on a few parts of jQuery, the biggest being jQuery.Ajax and the promise implementation.
> 
> i know we can make custom builds of jQuery pretty easily( building from source ),  but i don't really want to bundle it within our lib.
> 
> and i don't think with bower we can do this easily. although they did just add a post install hook, so perhaps that could be something to look at.
> 
> Datamanager only uses the promise implementation of jQuery( and some random thing for the filter method,  which could probably be updated ).   
> 
>  
> Promises are starting to become available natively in browsers and jQuery doesn't use the Promise/A+ spec,  so it could be harder to fallback without a shim of some kind
> 
> Good to know. Thanks for providing this info.
>  
> 
> sounds reasonable to 'wait' on the promise side of things, and use that bit in the datamanager
> 
> +1

there are other promise implementations that we could use, that are to spec,  such as Q and RSVP,  here is the link to the HTML5 rocks article  
http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/es6/promises/

> 
> 
> 
> while i don't really want to reinvent the wheel in terms of Ajax,  it might be interesting to take a look.
> 
> Yeah, IMO worth to look there, for reducing dependencies
> 
> -M
> 
>  
> 
>  
>  I think in a previous ML thread about what 2.0 looked like,  that Pipeline would maybe just be a JSON only thing, with exception for multipart
> 
> 
> 
> @Lucas Thanks for making things clear
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Matthias Wessendorf 
> 
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140324/046e14e3/attachment.html