search

zenhack / iron-blogger2

GNU General Public License v3.0
3 stars 3 forks source link

Using bower with openshift is a nightmare #20

Closed zenhack closed 9 years ago

zenhack commented 9 years ago

Thanks to @jywarren, the website is substantially nicer looking now. His patch pulled in some dependencies on things like bootstrap, jquery, and it uses bower to manage them.

Unfortunately, the version of npm available on openshift is too old to install bower. I also just have a philosophical problem with having node.js as a dependency for a flask app.

Right now, as a workaround, I've got a branch locally that I'm just committing the assets to, and then pushing them to openshift. This is horrid.

One possible solution: bower requires everything to be in a git repo anyway; why don't we just use git submodules instead? deploying would be way easier.

@jywarren, what do you think?

jywarren commented 9 years ago

I've had people grimace at me for suggesting submoduling static assets, but I really have no idea why. I have no problem with it -- bower is nice in that it doesn't pull in the whole repo, just the dist folder (or whatever's specified for production) and manages version dependencies, but we're not doing any heavy lifting in this setup, so its not a big deal. We really don't even need jquery at this point so we could remove that too. On Jun 5, 2015 3:58 PM, "Ian Denhardt" notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks to @jywarren https://github.com/jywarren, the website is substantially nicer looking now. His patch pulled in some dependencies on things like bootstrap, jquery, and it uses bower to manage them.

Unfortunately, the version of npm available on openshift is too old to install bower. I also just have a philosophical problem with having node.js as a dependency for a flask app.

Right now, as a workaround, I've got a branch locally that I'm just committing the assets to, and then pushing them to openshift. This is horrid.

One possible solution: bower requires everything to be in a git repo anyway; why don't we just use git submodules instead? deploying would be way easier.

@jywarren https://github.com/jywarren, what do you think?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/zenhack/iron-blogger2/issues/20.

zenhack commented 9 years ago

Will bootstrap break if we take out jquery? it specifies it as a dependency, and if we're doing submodules it won't pull things in recursively.

I'm going to go ahead and re-do that as submodules. I think it will make maintaining things a lot easier.

jywarren commented 9 years ago

I don't think bootstrap will break... i think it's possible we don't even need to use bootstrap js -- for now, I'm only using the styles.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Ian Denhardt notifications@github.com wrote:

Will bootstrap break if we take out jquery? it specifies it as a dependency, and if we're doing submodules it won't pull things in recursively.

I'm going to go ahead and re-do that as submodules. I think it will make maintaining things a lot easier.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/zenhack/iron-blogger2/issues/20#issuecomment-109494952 .

zenhack commented 9 years ago

Okay. I'm going to send a pr in a sec that just converts the current thing over to submodules (jquery included), which I'd like you to sanity check. We can try removing jquery as a separate patch.

jywarren commented 9 years ago

ok - i'm about to head out and will be traveling the weekend but will try to give it a go. tnx!

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Ian Denhardt notifications@github.com wrote:

Okay. I'm going to send a pr in a sec that just converts the current thing over to submodules (jquery included), which I'd like you to sanity check. We can try removing jquery as a separate patch.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/zenhack/iron-blogger2/issues/20#issuecomment-109495271 .