Open Stack

Just to make a context for this discussion, here are the two files that
where're speaking about:

https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/config/tree/modules/openstack_project/files/zuul/status.html
https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/config/tree/modules/openstack_project/files/zuul/status.js


On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Sergey Lukjanov <slukjanov at mirantis.com>wrote:

> Currently, we already have a simple status page in zuul repo and status
> page in infra/config, probably, we should think about moving them to the
> separated repo and merge their functionality and in this case it'll be easy
> to use any actual js tools. Otherwise it'll be not really straightforward
> to have internal node.js project in mostly-puppet infra/config or python
> zuul.
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 7:21 PM, Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com>wrote:
>
>> On 01/13/2014 05:05 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/12/2014 09:56 PM, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
>>>
>>>> If all you're looking for is a javascript-based in-browser templating
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>  Quick warning though, a lot of the javascript community out there uses
>>>> 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
>>> breaker.
>>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> I think, given that we seem to be doing more and more with javascript,
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Sergey Lukjanov
> Savanna Technical Lead
> Mirantis Inc.
>



-- 
Sincerely yours,
Sergey Lukjanov
Savanna Technical Lead
Mirantis Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140113/964ead51/attachment.html>