I'll remind you of one issue I've run into with our 1.x-based external
repositories: http://bugs.dojotoolkit.org/ticket/16645 which only makes the
transition more difficult. Unless that's resolved, I'd be opposed to any
further 1.x dojox migrations like this.


-Adam




On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Bill Keese wrote:

I assume CometD wasn't trying to maintain backwards compatibility. It's
easy to do from a technical perspective by using branches, and makes
backports easier. Just follow the instructions at
http://john.albin.net/git/convert-subversion-to-git and you can even
maintain the history from SVN.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 6:27 AM, Ben Hockey wrote:

having tried to use cometd in it's new incarnation, and never able to
quite figure out how it's supposed to work now (if it does at all), i'd say
that moving things to an external location while trying to make the
external code consumable as if it had never moved seems to be detrimental
to the external code and to dojox.

ben?

On Mar 17, 2013, at 4:19 PM, Bill Keese wrote:

Well, you could just use git branches (in git): have a branch for 1.x
support and then use master for back-compat breaking changes. (Not that
we ever guaranteed back-compat in DojoX, but if you want to be nice...)
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Ben Hockey wrote:

i tend to agree that 1.x is what it is and we should leave it as that.

even if we went the route of keeping things in dojox as svn:externals
then it would likely hamper the external project to have to continue to act
and behave as if it were part of dojox - e.g. extending the dojox global.
so, i don't see that as a good option either.

this doesn't stop us from building external projects during the course
of 1.x that would supersede the code in dojox and then leave users with the
choice to use the new project (with it's bug fixes, enhancements, etc) or
continue with the convenience of the dojox code that currently exists (but
without much ongoing maintenance).

ben...

On Mar 17, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Adam L. Peller wrote:

Thanks for pushing ahead on this, Kitson!

-1 on removing dojox packages from dojo 1.x, with the exception of
abandoned/hopelessly broken code. Though we may eventually choose to offer
a lower level of support on 1.x, I don't think we should break our API
promise.


On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Kitson Kelly wrote:

With the release of 1.9 imminent, we hopefully would release Dojo 2.0
before we release 1.10, at least that is the plan we have been discussing.
We also did not add any new sub-modules in Dojo 1.9 (or 1.8 if I remember
correctly). Obviously the core and widgets in 2.0 are still much a topic
of conversation. But there will not be a DojoX in 2.0. We have all agreed
to that. So we need to figure out what happens to the existing code base
post 1.9.

Ideally, anyone raising their hand to take a lead on a particular part
of DojoX would first get it working against Dojo 1.X and then as the Core
and widgets take shape, they transition to that. The beauty of AMD is that
it should mostly be a minor refactoring, but the "heavy lifting" is
breaking it out. This is what Dylan was referring to as "seeding" some
packages.

I have marked a few of the widgets in DojoX that I am fond of in the
document mentioned below and will be breaking them out into
a separate package. It will initially run against 1.9 (or SVN trunk), but
as Dojo 2.0 materialises, I will transition it to that. Hopefully there
are others willing to start the same process so we can all figure out how
we do this.

My suggestion would be that once a package is sufficiently standalone,
we remove its corresponding code from DojoX for 1.10 and beyond. In some
cases this will also allow us to close down lingering tickets in
bugs.dojotoolkit.org.

On 17 March 2013 11:13, Bill Keese wrote:

Not quite sure what you're suggesting by "pulling apart DojoX".

Do you mean to start github repositories for version 2.0 of gfx,
charting, mobile, etc.? I.E. creating projects to be used with Dojo core
2.0? Or rather, to move the existing 1.9 code to github? Or both?
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Kitson Kelly wrote:

All:

Time has come to start pulling apart DojoX as we move towards Dojo
2.0.

While all the packaging for Dojo 2.0 isn't finalised, I have created
a template package repository<https://github.com/kitsonk/dojo2-boilerplate-package/>.
I may not have covered off everything, so please feel free to PR anything
you think is important. There is also a wiki<https://github.com/kitsonk/dojo2-boilerplate-package/wiki>located there contains documentation and guidelines around packages,
including a listing of current packages that are already "broken out".
This is just there until we have finalised how we maintain a repository of
packages. Please contribute to all the content there. We need to flesh
out this particular aspect of Dojo 2.

We also need to make further work on how DojoX will be broken down.
Many of you have contributed to the Dojo Toolkit 2.0 - DojoX
Decomposition<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kPufZYy7G_nK90z3TlojK7hC10BTZdTF-N2UEFpoP5M/edit?usp=sharing>document, but we need to continue to figure out where things will go. In
particular, there are lots of single widgets in dojox/form and dojox/widget
and dojox/layout that need to either be grouped together in a
logical package or marked as abandoned. Even if something is a good idea,
or has a lot of users in Dojo 1.X, doesn't mean that someone has held up
their hand to put the effort into bringing that into Dojo 2.0. If you are
intend to do something with anything in there, please add to the document
so others can know your intent, otherwise a lot of the good ideas in DojoX
will simply get abandoned. Think of it as a cathartic spring cleaning.

Regards,
Kit

_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors



_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors



_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
_______________________________________________
dojo-contributors mailing list
dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20130317/227cefc8/attachment-0001.htm

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 12 of 39 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupdojo-contributors @
categoriesdojo
postedMar 17, '13 at 7:02a
activeApr 11, '13 at 10:44a
posts39
users7
websitedojotoolkit.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase