mordred at inaugust.com
Mon Jan 13 15:21:27 UTC 2014
On 01/13/2014 05:05 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 01/12/2014 09:56 PM, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
>> system, then handlebars is a fine choice. I'm not certain on how complex
>> status.html/status.js is, however if you expect it to grow to something
>> more like an application then perhaps looking at angular as a full
>> application framework might help you avoid both this growing pain and
>> future ones (alternatives: Ember, backbone, etc).
> Honestly, I've not done enough large scale js projects to know whether
> we'd consider status.js to be big or not. I just know it's definitely
> getting too big for += all the html together and doing document.writes.
> I guess the real question I had is is there an incremental path towards
> any of the other frameworks? I can see how to incrementally bring in
> templates, but again my personal lack of experience on these others
> means I don't know.
>> tooling that is built on top of Node.js, for which current official
>> packages for Centos/Ubuntu don't exist, and therefore infra won't
>> support it for openstack. Storyboard is able to get around this because
>> it's not actually part of openstack proper, but you might be forced to
>> manage your code manually. That's not a deal breaker in my opinion -
>> it's just more tedious (though I think it might be less tedious than
>> what you're doing right now).
> I'd ideally like to be able to function without node, mostly because
> it's another development environment to have to manager. But I realize
> that's pushing against the current at this point. So I agree, not a deal
Yeah - as a quick note though, just for clarity - this is only talking
about node as a dev/build time depend - not a runtime depend.
that we might should just bite the bullet and learn the toolchain - I'm
starting feel that doing all the js stuff without it is like the crazy
python people who refuse to touch pip for some reason.
More information about the OpenStack-dev