[aerogear-dev] AeroGear.js without jQuery Discussion

[Lucas Holmquist]

On Mar 24, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com> wrote:

> 
> On Mar 24, 2014, at 11:55 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 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/
>> 
>> These last days I have been playing with the library When provided by Cujo, it's maybe also worth looking https://github.com/cujojs/when
>> 
>> not sure I see value in using a different library as a temporary thing. Once the API is part of the browser platform, the need for [yet another js lib] goes away.
>> I know but I'm more concerned about  "Once the API is part of the browser platform" When will that happen and does it match with our roadmap ? Was also to offer a polyfill for older browser if we want to keep supporting them.
>> 
> i will have to update the roadmap.
> 
> 2.0 would be a nice time to "fully" switch,  but we can start experimenting now and maybe for 1.5 can have some implemenation for data manager only.
> 
> Current Chrome has Promise's enable by default and it looks like FireFox 29( next version ) will too.  Safari and IE are in dev i believe
> 
> for fallback we can still make use of jQuery i think because of this method here  "Promise.cast",  
please strike this comment from the record,  i'm an idiot :)

> although the closest lib to the spec is RSVP( maybe this could be the 2.0 fallback if we remove jQuery from the whole lib )
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140324/1c1890ca/attachment.html