[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: JS frameworks & the future of the LSMB UI
- Subject: Re: JS frameworks & the future of the LSMB UI
- From: Mikkel Høgh <..hidden..>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:15:26 +0200
A few notes of my own.
> There is decent CDN support for Dojo, but not for a few of the extensions I can see adding (primarily Dgrid at this point), and having a specific CDN hard-coded into an open source app seems like bad practice to me.
To quote Douglas Crockford “IT IS EXTREMELY UNWISE TO LOAD CODE FROM SERVERS YOU DO NOT CONTROL.” (his caps, not mine): https://github.com/douglascrockford/JSON-js/blob/master/json2.js#L15
On 31/07/2013, at 01.19, John Locke <..hidden..> wrote:
> On 07/30/2013 03:14 PM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>> 2. Longer term general direction for the development of the LedgerSMB UI
>> This point probably requires separate discussion, because the direction taken to develop a UI inherently affects the efforts required for the "back end". I.e. whether we from here on *only* develop services on the back end, with separate front-end developments, or that we develop along the current route which supports to build a rich front-end "eventually".
> I think we should continue to maintain a plain-HTML front end as a fallback, at least for the near future.
Realistically, how many users would actually need that? I don't have the statistics on hand, but unless we have end-users on ~15 year old browsers, there should be no need for a non-JS fallback. And keeping the fallback in place would make the development more difficult, thus slowing us down.
> So if you're amenable, I'd suggest let's go ahead with introducing Dojo as an included library, and let me, Brian, Herman, Mikkel, and anyone else who's comfortable plugging away at the JS side of things improve one screen/module at a time, with a goal of more complete coverage in 1.5, and then perhaps look at new UI paradigms for the release after that.
Sounds good to me.
> John Locke