search

OpenUserJS / OpenUserJS.org

The home of FOSS user scripts.
https://openuserjs.org/
GNU General Public License v3.0
847 stars 300 forks source link

Consider migrating away from jQuery #904

Open Martii opened 8 years ago

Martii commented 8 years ago

jQuery's limitations are becoming more apparent and is a perceived drain on everyone's resources with very little benefit as everything can be done natively in JavaScript with minimal impact.

Some browsers with their versions are being blocked by jQuery and has a negative effect on the world wide web browsing community. Maximum possible compatibility has been always been a goal and that seems to be an issue in the jQuery Core now.

The poor response from that project at jquery/jquery/issues/2940, jquery/jquery#2943, and jquery/jquery.com#121 are apparent along with a few reported violations of GH's TOS with that project. We do have at least one dependency that relies upon that dependency in the DOM but I assume there is something else to replace it.

This issue is not a venue for flaming but to decide long term the stability, functionality and repercussions of the changes in jQuery... and may be a long term meta discussion.

Cc: @jaubourg

Chairing this meta discussion.

Refs:

Martii commented 8 years ago

gnarf wrote:

https://jquery.org/conduct/reporting/ -- this is not the right venue for this issue.

@gnarf Thank you for that linkage however this is the discussion for this now with a more reasonable effort from staffing instead of what was received over there. I have no interest in jQuery's parliamentary process when it's clear that there won't be any fairness involved. Having jQuery promoting fear and intimidation through the community on a simple question isn't what I had in mind... so we'll make the appropriate discussions here.

Please feel free to pipe in specific to this issue as well as the simple questions that I asked over there that were un/answered with complete utter disregard for protocol.

My Corps are now in the fold as well and are considering migrating away from jQuery as well in closed session.

gnarf commented 8 years ago

Okay, I really don't appreciate your attitude here. I was offering you an official venue to report a problem if you really felt that someone violated our Code of Conduct.

I don't think that we are in any way promoting fear or intimidation, and in fact it is you who is doing so in this issue.

We've always taken a conservative stance when choosing which browsers to support in jQuery, and we try to push the envelope into cleaner, smaller footprints in newer environments lately. We just aren't in a world where supporting oldIE is that big of a concern for most web developers nowadays. Older versions of jQuery should continue to work on those older browsers, and we would probably consider releasing hotfixes for serious enough problems in the old branches even.

You're happy to use whatever library you want to, including none at all. I'm not understanding why us pointing you to the blog post we wrote describing in detail our decision to lock that jquery-latest at 1.11.1, or how Dave's attempts at explaining our reasoning again were only met with more absurdly leveled responses from you. We've made many attempts to keep this friendly, and happy, and obviously we will continue to support and develop jQuery. I apologize for the irritated responses from me and others to you spamming our issues with complaints about choices we labored over 2 years ago.

Martii commented 8 years ago

@gnarf,

I was offering you an official venue to report a problem if you really felt that someone violated our Code of Conduct.

And I politely and professionally thanked you for that polite and professional reply. Unfortunately having two "higher" members (and now possibly three) of jQuery being snarky (this is a synonym for "troll" btw... but predates that slang term) wasn't appreciated... so what we are left with is taking the appropriate actions here and in closed session projects.

We've made many attempts to keep this friendly, and happy...

That was definitely not the case over there... I asked a simple question which progressed into a bug report... after I found the correct venue, which wasn't given to me at all, I posted that issue at jquery/jquery.com#121 ... which was summarily dismissed in a derogatory manner... and unanswered. The question still stands... if it's state is deprecated and frozen as "Intended Behavior"... then other projects will make the necessary corrections... my other projects have been corrected on the web.

I appreciate your candidness and we are always open to reasonable issue discussions. I am opening this up to our Founders, Owners and others in the premise that we might be having more tasks added to the workflow that could be eliminated since jQuery is starting to drop browser support.

With the backlash encountered from at least two of jQuery's maintainers I am reluctant to ever open an issue over there for lack of a fair hearing.

Meta discussions exist here because of the extreme separation between projects that split development and policy... both go hand in hand in any good Corp/Organization.

Martii commented 8 years ago

Follow up comment for https://github.com/jquery/jquery.com/issues/121#issuecomment-188038618

That is as simple as it gets... since @gnarf is was? blocking me... I had no idea this was done until I rechecked it. Not the best move to lock a conversation for genuine constructive feedback with zero abrasive questions.

Thank you for the proper reply... would have been nice to read that first thing when that issue progressed to a potential bug report.

gnarf commented 8 years ago

I don't think anyone was trolling, Julian was actually probably angry/offended for Dave's sake, because Dave is a sweetheart who has a punny sense of humor, but really, would love for everyone to just be happy about things.

Sorry if we came off snarky... Though from where I'm standing, it's you who's being the troll, insinuating I wouldn't know what snarky meant. I'm going to go back to not worrying about this already solved problem, unless you'd like to actually report a jQuery Code of Conduct violation.

Martii commented 8 years ago

Julian was actually probably angry/offended for Dave's sake

Ouch... doesn't seem reasonable.

Dave is a sweetheart

with some unexpected behavior.

it's you who's being the troll, insinuating I wouldn't know what snarky meant.

Apologies for your perception on that... I constantly teach what I know and for others sake that may come down the line. This expert level, awarded, communication skill has been in my portfolio for decades and won't be changing any time soon... only further enhancements.

unless you'd like to actually report a jQuery Code of Conduct violation.

Unfair hearing again for a grievance... so thank you again but I must respectfully decline at this time to avoid the probable, presumed, outcome... plus you answered the question unlike the other two predecessors.

GreenLunar commented 8 years ago

Let alone and avoid personal behavior; focus on subjectivity. I have read https://github.com/jquery/jquery.com/issues/121 and I am commenting here because that issue is closed.

We can not remove this file. It's not possible. It would literally break millions of web pages in a few seconds if we did. We can not add alerts warning of deprecations to these files. We will forever bear this poor version of jquery-latest.js that is there because it was there, and is used by millions of web page visitors a day.

This is a blatant reason why not to use jquery, not to mention the issue of centralization which makes no sense, and is the foremost problem that harms the world wide web so badly. Due to this manner, I will not dedicate so much for even trying to understand jquery.

Martii commented 7 years ago

jQuery implementation bug of Ctrl+Click in row and Ctrl+Shift+Click in row resolved by migrating away. Presume that either selector a * doesn't work (took a little bit to figure out what was supposed to be checked) or wasn't implemented properly from previous referenced example.

Little things like these are a reason to use native Web API instead. Took a little bit of time since every browser, at near to latest release, had to be tested. Apologies for the noise. Let's hope this sticks after a few days.

Misc note: