Do we want to add dojox to the packages.dojofoundation.org? I know it is
not our end goal, but maybe we should for the utility of easily setting
existing directory structures? Does it have a valid/correct package.json?
Kris
On 2/11/2012 10:44 AM, Vladimir Elistratov wrote:
Hi Kris!

dojox isn't present in packages.dojofoundation.org
But my package djeo depends on dojox/gfx and dojox/xml

Is it done intentionally? May I add dojox to the list?

Best regards,
Vladimir

Search Discussions

  • Mike Wilcox at Feb 11, 2012 at 3:05 pm
    You mean - ALL of dojox?

    To me, managing dojox in its entirety is a huge boat anchor around my neck, and why I'm looking forward to the packages.

    My 2c anyway.

    Mike Wilcox
    http://clubajax.org
    mike at mikewilcox.net


    On Feb 11, 2012, at 1:59 PM, Kris Zyp wrote:

    Do we want to add dojox to the packages.dojofoundation.org? I know it is
    not our end goal, but maybe we should for the utility of easily setting
    existing directory structures? Does it have a valid/correct package.json?
    Kris
    On 2/11/2012 10:44 AM, Vladimir Elistratov wrote:
    Hi Kris!

    dojox isn't present in packages.dojofoundation.org
    But my package djeo depends on dojox/gfx and dojox/xml

    Is it done intentionally? May I add dojox to the list?

    Best regards,
    Vladimir
    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
    http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
  • Vladimir Elistratov at Feb 11, 2012 at 3:22 pm
    I'd suggest to add dojox to the packages.dojofoundation.org with a warning
    "to be deprecated after dojo 2.0; used only for dependencies".

    At the moment there is no way to download anything from dojox with cpm if a
    package depends on it.

    Vladimir
    On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mike Wilcox wrote:

    You mean - ALL of dojox?

    To me, managing dojox in its entirety is a huge boat anchor around my
    neck, and why I'm looking forward to the packages.

    My 2c anyway.

    Mike Wilcox
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20120212/3ba3d4fa/attachment.htm
  • Chris Barrett at Feb 11, 2012 at 3:40 pm
    It would be convenient to have dojox available via cpm.
    On Feb 11, 2012 2:22 PM, "Vladimir Elistratov" wrote:

    I'd suggest to add dojox to the packages.dojofoundation.org with a
    warning "to be deprecated after dojo 2.0; used only for dependencies".

    At the moment there is no way to download anything from dojox with cpm if
    a package depends on it.

    Vladimir
    On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mike Wilcox wrote:

    You mean - ALL of dojox?

    To me, managing dojox in its entirety is a huge boat anchor around my
    neck, and why I'm looking forward to the packages.

    My 2c anyway.

    Mike Wilcox

    _______________________________________________
    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/20120211/4acbd43a/attachment.htm
  • Tom Trenka at Feb 11, 2012 at 5:06 pm
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will be
    difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. If Vladmir needs
    it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts of dojox
    he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    2012/2/11 Chris Barrett <christophersbarrett at gmail.com>
    It would be convenient to have dojox available via cpm.
    On Feb 11, 2012 2:22 PM, "Vladimir Elistratov" wrote:

    I'd suggest to add dojox to the packages.dojofoundation.org with a
    warning "to be deprecated after dojo 2.0; used only for dependencies".

    At the moment there is no way to download anything from dojox with cpm if
    a package depends on it.

    Vladimir
    On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mike Wilcox wrote:

    You mean - ALL of dojox?

    To me, managing dojox in its entirety is a huge boat anchor around my
    neck, and why I'm looking forward to the packages.

    My 2c anyway.

    Mike Wilcox

    _______________________________________________
    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/20120211/f21c9ce2/attachment.htm
  • Kenneth G. Franqueiro at Feb 11, 2012 at 5:46 pm
    I'll admit that the "interim solution" Tom suggests here seems less than
    stellar, but I agree with it as opposed to the alternative; listing
    dojox as a dependency of projects is going to lead to tools like CPM
    automatically downloading far more than you ever actually need, just
    because dojox has tons of unrelated stuff in it.

    That said, perhaps as we see demand for particular dojox packages in
    other projects using the repo, perhaps we should take note and consider
    migrating those packages out sooner rather than later... however, I
    realize that's easier said than done, and we still have logistics to
    work out to that end. (Sorry I ended up being buried and missing the
    part of the last meeting that may have discussed this.)

    --Ken
    On 2/11/2012 5:06 PM, Tom Trenka wrote:
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will
    be difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. If Vladmir
    needs it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts
    of dojox he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    2012/2/11 Chris Barrett <christophersbarrett at gmail.com
    <mailto:christophersbarrett at gmail.com>>

    It would be convenient to have dojox available via cpm.

    On Feb 11, 2012 2:22 PM, "Vladimir Elistratov"
    <vvoovv.projects at gmail.com wrote:

    I'd suggest to add dojox to the packages.dojofoundation.org
    <http://packages.dojofoundation.org> with a warning "to be
    deprecated after dojo 2.0; used only for dependencies".

    At the moment there is no way to download anything from dojox
    with cpm if a package depends on it.

    Vladimir

    On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mike Wilcox
    <mike at mikewilcox.net wrote:

    You mean - ALL of dojox?

    To me, managing dojox in its entirety is a huge boat anchor
    around my neck, and why I'm looking forward to the packages.

    My 2c anyway.

    Mike Wilcox


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


    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
    <mailto: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
  • Vladimir Elistratov at Feb 12, 2012 at 3:39 am
    There is no need to remove dojox. If a package still depends on dojox/*
    after dojo 2.0 it still can download dojox via cpm. However I do think that
    the huge size of dojox might confuse an app developer.

    So what about a plan to convert popular dojox projects to separate
    packages? Personally I'd vote for gfx and charting.


    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will be
    difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. If Vladmir needs
    it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts of dojox
    he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20120212/1736178d/attachment.htm
  • Tom Trenka at Feb 12, 2012 at 10:40 am
    There are some plans and experiments in progress for converting older DojoX
    code into packages, but I don't see that happening in full for 1.8. Top
    priorities are definitely gfx and charting, but both rely on other packages
    (such as math and lang), and I'm unsure what the plan is for some of that.
    I will be converting math sooner than later...

    The big problem at the moment is that we have not fully decided on
    documentation and testing yet, though. Both need to be solved before
    packages can really be implemented.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    2012/2/12 Vladimir Elistratov <vvoovv.projects at gmail.com>
    There is no need to remove dojox. If a package still depends on dojox/*
    after dojo 2.0 it still can download dojox via cpm. However I do think that
    the huge size of dojox might confuse an app developer.

    So what about a plan to convert popular dojox projects to separate
    packages? Personally I'd vote for gfx and charting.


    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will be
    difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. If Vladmir needs
    it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts of dojox
    he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom
    _______________________________________________
    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/20120212/0a1cc833/attachment.htm
  • Peter Kokot at Feb 16, 2012 at 12:41 pm
    Hello,

    I am in advance very sorry if I will sound stupid and way off or even
    rude with the following statements. I hope you will not get me wrong
    here, because I did not check the 2.0 stuff very well yet and I wish
    only best for everyone.

    Dojo is currently having a huge problem with dojox. I think "trend"
    will go in contributing from people and companies from everywhere.

    Check for instance PHP frameworks Zend and Symfony. They both are
    trying to have "packages". Symfony is having bundles, Zend is having
    modules. These bundles and modules are here exactly what Dojo is
    perhaps trying to do with dojox.

    For instance Symfony is currently "leader" with bundles, where
    everyone can create one and then someone else is trying to extend
    someone else's bundle etc. This ecosystem is working very well and is
    very productive. That is how the most stable bundles are going to
    production and to become somehow "officially supported" ones. If not
    from Symfony then from someone elses company.

    Zend on the other hand is doing this similar system very slowly
    however is doing basically the same thing.

    http://knpbundles.com
    http://modules.zendframework.com

    Maybe we should consider some sort of public sandbox (github maybe)
    for making these dojox packages more stable and that how automatically
    pushing things to go to most stable dijit and dojo.

    Dojo is simply the best, however. JQuery is currently too much
    defragmented and disorganized and too huge I think.


    Thank you.



    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>:
    There are some plans and experiments in progress for converting older DojoX
    code into packages, but I don't see that happening in full for 1.8. ?Top
    priorities are definitely gfx and charting, but both rely on other packages
    (such as math and lang), and I'm unsure what the plan is for some of that.
    ?I will be converting math sooner than later...

    The big problem at the moment is that we have not fully decided on
    documentation and testing yet, though. ?Both need to be solved before
    packages can really be implemented.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    2012/2/12 Vladimir Elistratov <vvoovv.projects at gmail.com>
    There is no need to remove dojox. If a package still depends on dojox/*
    after dojo 2.0 it still can download dojox via cpm. However I do think that
    the huge size of dojox might confuse an app developer.

    So what about a plan to convert popular dojox projects to separate
    packages? Personally I'd vote for gfx and charting.


    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will be
    difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. ?If Vladmir needs
    it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts of dojox
    he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    _______________________________________________
    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


    --
    Peter Kokot
    Maastermedia

    +386 40 475 386
    www.m-m.si
  • Dylan Schiemann at Feb 16, 2012 at 1:09 pm
    Give or take a few details, this is very close to the plan.

    Regards,
    - -Dylan

    on 2/16/12 10:41 AM (GMT-07:00) Peter Kokot said the following:
    Hello,

    I am in advance very sorry if I will sound stupid and way off or even
    rude with the following statements. I hope you will not get me wrong
    here, because I did not check the 2.0 stuff very well yet and I wish
    only best for everyone.

    Dojo is currently having a huge problem with dojox. I think "trend"
    will go in contributing from people and companies from everywhere.

    Check for instance PHP frameworks Zend and Symfony. They both are
    trying to have "packages". Symfony is having bundles, Zend is having
    modules. These bundles and modules are here exactly what Dojo is
    perhaps trying to do with dojox.

    For instance Symfony is currently "leader" with bundles, where
    everyone can create one and then someone else is trying to extend
    someone else's bundle etc. This ecosystem is working very well and is
    very productive. That is how the most stable bundles are going to
    production and to become somehow "officially supported" ones. If not
    from Symfony then from someone elses company.

    Zend on the other hand is doing this similar system very slowly
    however is doing basically the same thing.

    http://knpbundles.com
    http://modules.zendframework.com

    Maybe we should consider some sort of public sandbox (github maybe)
    for making these dojox packages more stable and that how automatically
    pushing things to go to most stable dijit and dojo.

    Dojo is simply the best, however. JQuery is currently too much
    defragmented and disorganized and too huge I think.


    Thank you.



    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>:
    There are some plans and experiments in progress for converting older DojoX
    code into packages, but I don't see that happening in full for 1.8. Top
    priorities are definitely gfx and charting, but both rely on other packages
    (such as math and lang), and I'm unsure what the plan is for some of that.
    I will be converting math sooner than later...

    The big problem at the moment is that we have not fully decided on
    documentation and testing yet, though. Both need to be solved before
    packages can really be implemented.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    2012/2/12 Vladimir Elistratov <vvoovv.projects at gmail.com>
    There is no need to remove dojox. If a package still depends on dojox/*
    after dojo 2.0 it still can download dojox via cpm. However I do think that
    the huge size of dojox might confuse an app developer.

    So what about a plan to convert popular dojox projects to separate
    packages? Personally I'd vote for gfx and charting.


    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will be
    difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. If Vladmir needs
    it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts of dojox
    he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom
    _______________________________________________
    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
  • Peter Kokot at Feb 22, 2012 at 3:12 pm
    Right. This is actually exactly what is needed. Very good, thank you.
    On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Dylan Schiemann wrote:
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Give or take a few details, this is very close to the plan.

    Regards,
    - -Dylan

    on 2/16/12 10:41 AM (GMT-07:00) Peter Kokot said the following:
    Hello,

    I am in advance very sorry if I will sound stupid and way off or even
    rude with the following statements. I hope you will not get me wrong
    here, because I did not check the 2.0 stuff very well yet and I wish
    only best for everyone.

    Dojo is currently having a huge problem with dojox. I think "trend"
    will go in contributing from people and companies from everywhere.

    Check for instance PHP frameworks Zend and Symfony. They both are
    trying to have "packages". Symfony is having bundles, Zend is having
    modules. These bundles and modules are here exactly what Dojo is
    perhaps trying to do with dojox.

    For instance Symfony is currently "leader" with bundles, where
    everyone can create one and then someone else is trying to extend
    someone else's bundle etc. This ecosystem is working very well and is
    very productive. That is how the most stable bundles are going to
    production and to become somehow "officially supported" ones. If not
    from Symfony then from someone elses company.

    Zend on the other hand is doing this similar system very slowly
    however is doing basically the same thing.

    http://knpbundles.com
    http://modules.zendframework.com

    Maybe we should consider some sort of public sandbox (github maybe)
    for making these dojox packages more stable and that how automatically
    pushing things to go to most stable dijit and dojo.

    Dojo is simply the best, however. JQuery is currently too much
    defragmented and disorganized and too huge I think.


    Thank you.



    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>:
    There are some plans and experiments in progress for converting older DojoX
    code into packages, but I don't see that happening in full for 1.8. ?Top
    priorities are definitely gfx and charting, but both rely on other packages
    (such as math and lang), and I'm unsure what the plan is for some of that.
    ?I will be converting math sooner than later...

    The big problem at the moment is that we have not fully decided on
    documentation and testing yet, though. ?Both need to be solved before
    packages can really be implemented.

    Cheers--
    Tom

    2012/2/12 Vladimir Elistratov <vvoovv.projects at gmail.com>
    There is no need to remove dojox. If a package still depends on dojox/*
    after dojo 2.0 it still can download dojox via cpm. However I do think that
    the huge size of dojox might confuse an app developer.

    So what about a plan to convert popular dojox projects to separate
    packages? Personally I'd vote for gfx and charting.


    2012/2/12 Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com>
    I would suggest *not* adding DojoX to packages, mainly because it will be
    difficult (support-wise) to explain why it was removed. ?If Vladmir needs
    it, he can do what many others do when using dgrid: copy the parts of dojox
    he needs for djeo.

    Cheers--
    Tom
    _______________________________________________
    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
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

    iEYEARECAAYFAk89RmEACgkQ1E2HcBNypM5YTQCfcSpg8vrPvCaUcsvNPRSRKbYO
    ZPAAn1gVjF9SghiduKwiZxUpVFEeTRm7
    =5ubN
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    _______________________________________________
    dojo-contributors mailing list
    dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
    http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupdojo-contributors @
categoriesdojo
postedFeb 11, '12 at 2:59p
activeFeb 22, '12 at 3:12p
posts11
users8
websitedojotoolkit.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase