----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> Cc: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 4:43:44 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Tools for developing and building oVirt.js project
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> Cc: "Tomas Jelinek" <tjelinek@redhat.com>, "Mooli Tayer" <mtayer@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 8:05:58 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Tools for developing and building oVirt.js project
Il 28/08/2014 21:00, Vojtech Szocs ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo@redhat.com> To: "Tomas Jelinek" <tjelinek@redhat.com>, "Mooli Tayer" <mtayer@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 12:03:14 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Tools for developing and building oVirt.js project
Il 26/08/2014 09:38, Tomas Jelinek ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mooli Tayer" <mtayer@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 9:17:20 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Tools for developing and building oVirt.js project
Are we talking about using node as a development/test/packaging(minify etc ) tool or having a runtime backend (site) on top of node?
It is only devel environment (e.g. build dependency), not runtime.
If it's build dependency it's not just devel environment.
Right, I messed up my comment above, sorry.
Node.js can be (and typically is) used as both devel & build dependency for JavaScript projects.
We must ensure that all required build dependencies are available and properly packaged for all supported distributions.
Yes, fully agreed.
Fedora already has some packages we could use, for example: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=15154 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=15356
However, there's one complication (as Greg mentioned before): npm (Node package manager) resolves Node-specific packages (esentially JavaScript artifacts) via HTTP access, so we'd need some infra to serve these, and for each such JS module: - either use existing package for that JS module, if one exists - or maintain package for that JS module on our own [*]
[*] I understand that this is not what we want to do in general
I would add - Ask supported distributions to provide needed rpms
Well, that ^^ would be ideal.
In other words, there would have to be some infra to support builds for JavaScript/Node.js projects, similar to existing infra to support builds for Java/Maven projects: - package for Node.js + npm - package for each JS module (likely problematic) - tool (existing Artifactory that serves Maven artifacts?) to serve JS modules via HTTP for npm to consume (maybe problematic)
Adding infra for above
In any case, we can proceed with developing oVirt.js without requiring Node.js as a build dependency. I see two possible solutions here:
1, avoid using build tools like Traceur (ES6 -> ES5 transpiler) and UglifyJS (code compressor/obfuscator), just concatenate JS source files into resulting JS target file (either via command in Makefile or via some Maven plugin)
PROS: no special build requirements CONS: can't use tools like Traceur
2, use build tools like Traceur and UglifyJS, commit resulting JS target file into source tree, maybe with git commit hook for this
PROS: can use tools like Traceur CONS: storing target JS file in source tree
3, (?)
Use something simpler to package for compressing / minimizing like http://yui.github.io/yuicompressor/ or any other tool like that at build time (nothing against Node.js at development time).
YUI Compressor is written in Java, we could use it within our Java-based Engine build. It seems that YUI Compressor uses Rhino (JS engine written in Java) with some custom Rhino extensions/tweaks.
I didn't find Fedora package for YUI Compressor, but I found this:
http://davidb.github.io/yuicompressor-maven-plugin/
And luckily, this Maven plugin is also in JBoss Maven repo:
https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/service/local/repositories/central/conten...
OK, now some bad news. According to this:
http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2012/10/16/state-of-yui-compressor/
development on YUI Compressor continues through JavaScript (surprise!) project yUglify (it's based on UglifyJS which I proposed way above):
https://github.com/yui/yuglify
And, not surprisingly, yUglify is Node.js module. Here we go :)
As everyone can see, all popular tools for JavaScript development are pretty much centered around Node.js, that is not coincidence. Avoiding Node.js for JavaScript development complicates the whole development and build process (from developer's perspective).
OK, now what we can do. I suggest to use wro4j (Java-based):
https://code.google.com/p/wro4j/
wro4j uses Rhino to execute most of its "processors", including UglifyJsProcessor. As I wrote before, wro4j bundles JS tools (like UglifyJS) that are developed against Node.js runtime, and runs them via Rhino. As a result, you can invoke JS development tools from within Java environment.
It's available in JBoss Maven repo:
https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/service/local/repositories/central/conten...
Conclusion:
* can we use wro4j-maven-plugin for now? (OK to add new Maven plugin dependency?)
Additionally, we could pull JS dependencies (such as Lo-Dash) as webjars through Maven, for example: https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/service/local/repositories/central/conten... As for Traceur, I guess that we could just use it "on-the-fly" (compilation happens during page load) as described here: https://code.google.com/p/traceur-compiler/wiki/GettingStarted Overall, assuming we can introduce some new Maven (plugin/JAR) dependencies into Engine build, we can avoid Node.js runtime required for the build; Node.js would be purely a devel/test env. dependency.
* in the long term, supporting Node.js within our build infra (still) seems needed, assuming we're in agreement about modularizing (currently monolithic) GWT UI, with JavaScript becoming the common base UI technology
What do you think?
Note that this might work for small projects in short term.
If we agree that JavaScript is the common base technology for oVirt frontend, not having well-established build environment (such as Node.js) will make it very hard to develop and maintain bigger JavaScript projects in the long term.
I'd just like to point out that one thing is the development of the ovirt.js itself which is not going to be a big project and I can imagine also using less ideal (slower) tools for it's development.
A completely different story will be when (if) we decide to use ovirt.js to develop some parts of the webadmin/userportal in javascript instead of GWT (or even rewrite the whole FE to JS) which will be a big project (set of projects).
If we want to be effective in that effort, we will need good tools.
From my perspective I can't stress enough how important is the separation of ovirt UI part from the backend. I agree to everything Vojtech said about developing to the browser with java.
Mooli.
----- Original Message ----- > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> >> To: devel@ovirt.org >> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 11:13:38 AM >> Subject: [ovirt-devel] Tools for developing and building oVirt.js >> project >> >> Hi guys, >> >> last week, we had "oVirt.js PoC" session and I mentioned the >> possibility >> of using Node.js and related tools like npm to develop & build >> oVirt.js >> project. >> >> I'd like to hear your opinion - what do you think about using >> Node.js >> in >> context of developing & building JavaScript projects? (oVirt.js >> etc.) >> >> Obviously, I'm strongly biased towards Node.js because of its >> popularity >> and therefore availability of various tools (npm packages) for >> JavaScript, >> for example: grunt (task runner), jslint/hint (code analyzer), >> uglifyjs >> (minify/compress), karma (both one-time & continuous test runner), >> traceur >> (es6 -> es5 compiler), etc. >> >> My understanding is that any special-purpose JavaScript development >> tool >> is typically implemented as module for Node.js (due to its >> popularity), >> so I think it makes sense to use Node.js as a platform for >> JavaScript >> development. >> >> There are also Java-based projects for JavaScript (post)processing >> like >> wro4j, however these tend to be implemented by invoking JS tools >> (like >> uglifyjs) from Java context via Rhino (JS engine for Java), for >> example: >> >> https://code.google.com/p/wro4j/source/browse/wro4j-extensions/src/main/java... >> >> (To me, developing JavaScript project with Java-centric tooling >> sounds >> quite strange in general.) >> >> There's also webjars repository for hosting popular web resources >> for >> use in Java applications (i.e. Maven artifact for uglifyjs etc.), >> but >> this is just for easier dependency management from Java perspective >> (JAR file as a distribution format for web resources): >> >> http://www.webjars.org/ >> >> Overall, I'm in favor of using Node.js to manage all tasks related >> to >> JavaScript development and build process. If you have any objections >> or suggestions, I'd like to hear them! >> >> (I understand that Node.js essentially means new dependency with all >> implications, but in this case, I think it's worth it. But this is >> just me, so please share your opinions.) >> >> Thanks, >> Vojtech > > I think most developers would agree that node.js is the tool of > choice > for > JavaScript development. > > The thing we must carefully consider is that node.js uses its own > package > manager (npm -- much like maven), and unlike maven, tooling does not > yet > exist to deal with npm packages in an rpm environment. > > This isn't on the same level as adding a logging library or a > collections > library or something. I'd argue that dependencies don't get any > heavier > than this one. That is worrisome to me. > > Run 'yum list available |grep nodejs' on your machine to see which > node.js > packages are available. Note that I don't see karma or uglify > available > in > either Fedora or Red Hat SCL (Software Collections) [1]. > > [1] > https://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/nodejs010-RHSCL-1-RHEL-6/Server/x86_64/os/... > > Greg > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel