[dojo-contributors] Module formats for the browser

Eugene Lazutkin eugene at lazutkin.com
Fri Mar 26 11:56:05 EDT 2010


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I think everybody is in agreement that we want to have interoperability
with XXX library as a separate plugin somewhere in DojoX. Obviously XXX
can be CommonJS too. (I assume that there is a wealth of modules in this
format that our users want to use --- I didn't really check.)

Regarding RequireJS --- it is not backward compatible with what we have,
so until this situation changes it cannot be introduced before 2.0.

2.0 was not even seriously discussed as a concept oon any level. IMHO,
RequireJS is a good contender for 2.0, but in order to make an informed
decision I would prefer to see goals and directions first.

Example: if majority of users/developers see Dojo 2.0 is a major library
on top of Rhino CommonJS should be considered as a cornerstone of the
future library. If people see Dojo 2.0 as a premier tool to create
applications for Blackberry --- the design decisions will be totally
different and I suspect that CommonJS is not going to be in play for
that platform. The need for RequireJS can be analyzed the same way.

Eugene Lazutkin
http://lazutkin.com/


On 03/26/2010 08:12 AM, Kris Zyp wrote:
> The preference of whether to code Dojo in CommonJS format or not, and
> the value of that in making Dojo readily available in that format does
> go well beyond the technical, and if most don't want to code in that
> format, I am fine with that. If we can support the CommonJS transport
> format through RequireJS, that is enough awesome for me.
> 
> I am correct that there is general agreement that we should move to
> RequireJS for module loading in the future? Does my migration path (I
> think it is still applicable) seem like reasonable path towards RequireJS?
> 
> I think the one other question is whether we should support naked
> CommonJS modules (sync loading without transport wrapping). I would say
> that does not belong in base (and maybe not core either), but maybe
> create a module (maybe in dojox) that could handle this.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkus2RAACgkQY214tZwSfCtEOACgneuLGWTiQWW9OYJ9Hjngm0Rh
0m4AniR7NZEe/Hlb1fOsy0SHYOChmhw1
=Q/98
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list