Now that interface is dead…
Well, interface is dead. It will not be developed further. Instead they have created jQuery UI and replaces interface.
My question, bbPress uses the interface libary (which part of bbPress uses it anyway?), will it be dropped and be replaced with jQuery UI?
Though UI is still a bit buggy, it is going to replace interface.
I *still* find it hilarious that forum software uses a mailing list.
Developers should use the product they develop!
Email lists are so 1990’s
We should have a sub-forum here or if they aren’t willing I’d be happy to host on bbshowcase
Indeed, if the devs aren’t reading this and only using the mailinglist, why is this forum here anyway?
> why is this forum here anyway?
The mailing list has less non-dev chatter. In fact it has none, so if people post dev related stuff there, they are more likely to get noticed. Most of the traffic here is community support – high quality community support I might add – but not generally stuff that directly relates to development of the codebase.
As for the question about jQuery UI, I guess we’ll move if there is a compelling reason. I’m sure there could be, and if you put a case either here or on the dev mailing list we can discuss it further.
BTW, we still only run jQuery 1.1.4 and jQuery UI requires 1.2.1
All we use from the Interface library is “Sortables”:
This is probably easily replaceable by the jQuery UI counterpart.
We have some other priorities first though, I propose the following path:
1. Upgrade to jQuery 1.2.1
2. Remove Prototype JS and replace with jQuery
3. Move accross to jQuery UI
It seems to have a direct counterpart: http://docs.jquery.com/UI/Sortables
It sounds good to me, Sam. Getting rid of Prototype would really reduce the size to download and push people into developing with jQuery.
> I *still* find it hilarious that forum software uses a mailing list.
Yes, yes. You’ve said that several times now. It’s *really* not relevant. Please don’t spam topics. If you want to discuss this, start a new topic or a new thread on the mailing list.
I noticed that the trunk (well at least 1075) is loading both jquery.js and prototype.js
Can’t prototype.js be completely depricated in the trunk?
Is anything still using it or can I safely disable the 50k download it causes for each new visitor?
Oh, also, don’t use the packed version of jquery. It may look nice at 30k but you can literally see the browser pause for a second or two while it unpacks it – for EVERY single page load. My topic load times go from 1 second to 4 seconds when using jquery packed, but back to 1.5 seconds for the unpacked version.
If you use the unpacked version (however scary at 90k in size these days) it never has to unpack and most servers that are properly configured will use gzip on the transfer anyway, so it’s back to 30k for the transfer and instantly ready for use. There is a huge discussion about this on ajaxian and elsewhere and I still don’t see why people fall for the packed “trick”. In fact the authors keep trying to come up with ways to make it seem smaller but that only uses slower decompression routines. It’s silliness. They should just break it up into subset libraries.
We’re in the process of writing out Prototype. Can you give us some links to the discussions you mentioned about packed JS.
It’s fairly easy to test loading/decoding times using firefox+fasterfox or firebug but there are plenty of studies around the web if you want nitty-gritty details:
a quick search:
jquery with simple whitespace removal and variable name shrinking, *not* actual compression, sent via a server with proper gzip support (mod_gzip, apache2, litespeed, etc) is always fastest. Packed is always the worst. Not only that, packed has to be unpacked for EVERY page load. It’s never ready to run. So it uses more browser memory, and has a delay *every* time.
If you absolutely must distribute bbpress (and wordpress) with jquery in a more compressed form, please use the jsmin version but definitely not the packed version.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.