Generic Bundling

Jeremy Darling jeremy.darling at gmail.com
Fri Oct 11 07:17:50 PDT 2013


The way I read the proposal (and I could be wrong here), you would have
copies on your server in the appropriate locations.  So I may have a /js/
folder with all my core JS inside it, and a /vendor/*/ with each vendor
package inside of it.  I could have multiple asset package's (one for my
core, one for each vendor code, or maybe one for all vendor code), or I
could simply have a single asset package referenced.  If the browser knows
what to do with it all it will pull down the package files, extract it/them
and use the code from the package.  If not it would call back to the server
for each file that it needed on the page.

Basically, here is my understanding in pseudo code (there may be typos
below);

<html>
  <head>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="/vendor/jquery/jquery.min.js"
ref="/pkg/jquery.zip"></script>
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="/vendor/skeleton/css/base.css" ref="/pkg/skeleton.zip" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="/vendor/skeleton/css/skeleton.css" ref="/pkg/skeleton.zip" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
href="/vendor/skeleton/css/layout.css" ref="/pkg/skeleton.zip" />
  </head>
  <body>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="/js/myLoader.js"
ref="/pkg/app.zip"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="/js/mySupportScript.js"
ref="/pkg/app.zip"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="/js/app.js"
ref="/pkg/app.zip"></script>
  </body>
</html>

My thoughts, after reading, are that there would be three requests or
pushes back for /pkg/jquery.zip, /pgk/skeleton.zip, and /pkg/app.zip when
the browser supported packaging.  If the browser didn't then you would see
7 requests to get the assets.

Course, I could be wrong :)


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Russell Leggett
<russell.leggett at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Jeremy Darling <jeremy.darling at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> HTTP 2.0 will require changes to servers for it to work properly, it will
>> also require that developers learn a bit more about the pipeline or rely on
>> some vendor to implement the "smarts" for them.
>>
>> Asset Bundling on the other hand will provide a quick and easy transition
>> for most development communities.  Compress everything, update your ref's
>> and wait for the browsers to catch up, or for your server dev team to work
>> out push.
>>
>> You could still push your asset bundle with HTTP 2.0 and achieve
>> basically the same results as if you bundled all the assets and sent them
>> down the pipe with HTTP 2.0.
>>
>> I don't see them as foe's or alternatives to one another.  Quite to the
>> opposite, they seem to compliment each other quite well.
>>
>>
> Well, just so I understand - let's say you have 100 JavaScript files you
> want in your bundle. Can you explain to me the strategy for handling the
> fallback unsupported case? Does the bundle contain module based code
> assuming es6 and the fallback is all es5 code using traceur or something?
> Just trying to get a vision for this.
>
> - Russ
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20131011/e543fc31/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list