I'm trying to leverage GruntJS to create a build process that is uniform across multiple teams and projects at my company. The idea hear is that we have a config file for each application that only specifies the files that need to be processed and what bundles they need to be concatenated into at the end. The build process would be the same for all apps: pick up the config for the app, process files in each bundle using a uniform build process.
For Example:
asset.json config file specifies two bundles, "main" with 1.js + 2.js and "secondary" with 2.js and 3.js
Build process says for each bundle, preprocess, minify, then concatenate into a js file based on the bundle
Get output of "main.js" and "secondary.js"
The problem I'm running into is that Grunt takes a "static" configuration and executes it. I've already abstracted out the building of the configuration so that I can add chunks dynamically, but right now I don't see a better way forward than literally looping over each bundle and building out a unique task for each section of the build process for each bundle, building up queues of tasks to execute, and then running each task in the queues during the build process. Its definitely possible, but its a lot of manual work and seems prone to breaking. Is there way to just execute each task in order as I loop over the bundles? Any better way to achieve the same net result of config + source in, N bundles out?
I want to be clear that I am fully aware that Grunt CAN build multiple files. What I'm trying to do is separate the specification of how many bundles from the build steps themselves. Grunt core has to bake these two things together which means each project would have to go in and alter their build steps rather than an external configuration. As per the example above, I should be able to swap out the asset.json file specified in step 1 for any config file that has 1, 2, 3, ... N bundles with N files in each one (and potentially specifying a "type" like scripts or styles).
Edit 10/12/13: The Nitty Gritty posted an article yesterday that might be another approach to tackling your issue.
This can be done by passing the module name you want to build as a command line argument and loading in the whole assets file in your grunt config. Please note this is example code, I have not tested this, so it's possible you need to set paths etc. correct for your case.
Start with updating the assets.json file to a plain JavaScript file, and reform it like so:
module.exports = {
main: ["1.js", "2.js"],
secondary: ["2.js","3.js"]
}
Next, you can pass a command line argument to Grunt, which should specify one of the module names in assets.js. Example:
grunt --bundle=main
Now, you'll need to load in the assets.js file in the Gruntfile:
var assets = require('./assets'); // assuming assets.js is on the same level as your Gruntfile
And then you can get the argument name by using:
var bundle = grunt.option("bundle");
Now you can use bundle as your output file name and assets.bundle to get the array files for that bundle.
Related
We have one ASP.Net solution with several projects. each project have build.pubxml with unique folder path.
For example:
In project Test we have this line inside the build.pubxml:
<publishUrl>C:\publish\SolutionName\Test</publishUrl>
In project Exam we have this line inside the build.pubxml:
<publishUrl>C:\publish\SolutionName\Exam</publishUrl>
In the build pipeline (in TFS) with have MSBuild step with this argument:
/p:PublishProfile=build.pubxml
After the build we got 2 folders - Test and Exam in C:\publish\SolutionName.
So far so good.
The problem is we have few branches, and we want to separate the publish folder for each branch, so we added .pubxml for each branch and in the build pipeline we specified the correct one. but is make are a lot of work on each new branch created and can cause mistakes.
We tried to pass the /p:publishUrl=C:\publish\BranchName in the MSBuild but then we got a one folder with all the content of Test and Exam and not two folders.
The idea is to have only one .pubxml file for each project with a parameter and pass the value in the pipeline, for example:
<publishUrl>C:\publish\$(Parameter)\Test</publishUrl>
And in the build we will pass the parameter according to the branch.
It is possible to do something like this?
It is possible to do something like this?
The answer is Yes. Since msbuild accepts Global Properties in command-line. If we define one Property in build.pubxml like <publishUrl>C:\PublishFolders\$(BranchID)\xxx(Test,Exam...)</publishUrl>, then we can simply pass the value in msbuild arguments like this:
Then we'll get Test and Exam folders under C:\PublishFolders\NewTest. Also we can choose to pass the pipeline predefined variables to the command like: /p:BranchID=$(Build.SourceBranch)...
This works for build in local machine, tfs and Azure Devops pipeline. Hope all above helps :)
In a cross Scala JS server / client project, I want changes of some sources to restart the server and other sources to trigger the packaging process, but without the restart. Different tasks will not help because they will simply do one or the other and I want both at the same time.
In more detail:
I've got a Scala.js crossProject. I'm using the following to ensure the server can serve the built JavScript:
val app = crossProject.settings(...)
lazy val appJS = app.js
lazy val jsFile = fastOptJS in(appJS, Compile)
lazy val appJVM = app.jvm.settings(
(resources in Compile) += jsFile.value.data,
(resources in Compile) += jsFile.value.data.toPath.resolveSibling(jsFile.value.data.name+".map").toFile,
(resources in Compile) += (packageJSDependencies in(appJS, Compile)).value
)
If I run ~ appJVM/compile:packageBin::packageConfiguration then changes to the JavaScript source are immediately compiled and placed in the appJVM target/classes dir, so a refresh of the browser gets my new code - brilliant.
However, I would also like to use the sbt-revolver plugin to restart the server if I edit server-side code. But there's the rub - if I use ~ ;appJVM/compile:packageBin::packageConfiguration;appJVM/reStart then changes to the client side source restart the server, which I don't want. But if I remove the client side project from the transitive watch then it no longer notices if I change the client side project.
Is there a way to define watchTransitiveSources differently per task?
~ is actually a command that watches the transitive sources of the base project and then synchronously runs everything passed as an argument to it when those change, before re-running the original input (including ~). It does not make any information about what has changed available to those command line inputs (difficult to see how it could).
Consequently the solution I came to is to write a new watch command. It also needs to watch all sources, but then conditionally choose what to do based on which files have changed.
I've hacked something ugly as anything together that does this, but will look at making it more legible, general, tested and a Plugin. However, in the meantime anyone trying to follow my path can use this public gist: https://gist.github.com/LeisureMonitoringAdmin/0eb2e775e47b40f07d9e6d58d17b6d52
Are you sure you are using sbt-resolver not sbt-revolver ?
Because the second one allows controlling the triggered resources using
watchSources - defines the files for a single project that are
monitored for changes. By default, a project watches resources and
Scala and Java sources.
watchTransitiveSources - then combines the
watchSources for the current project and all execution and classpath
dependencies (see .scala build definition for details on interProject
dependencies).
Source: http://www.scala-sbt.org/0.13/docs/Triggered-Execution.html
I was wondering if it was possible to access the settings defined within my karma.config.js file, and if so how?
I'm currently using a Grunt task runner to perform various tasks like building, linting, packaging, etc. I'm also using Grunt to kick off the Karma test runner to run my Jasmine unit tests. Furthermore, I'm pulling in the Jasmine-jQuery library so I can define and read in JSON and HTML fixtures from separate files that I setup earlier.
While I was writing some new tests, I noticed that I was redefining my fixtures base path in every test file. So I decided to pull it out and put it into a global constant.
The problem I'm having is where I should define it. Currently, I have a file named "testSettings.js" that I'm including in my karma configuration, where I define a configuration object and set it to window.testSettings. Thats all well and good, but I think it would be better if I defined it within my karma configuration and then just referenced that from my tests. But there doesn't look like a way to do this... or is there?
My library versions are:
"karma": "~0.12.32"
"karma-jasmine": "~0.3.5"
"karma-jasmine-jquery": "~0.1.1"
I am new to gruntJS. Looking at the tutorials/presentations, I believe it is awesome.
Currently, we are using batch scripts in our web + embedded project, which performs the following tasks:
Merges all the JS file into one.
Merges all the CSS file into one.
Kills existing .EXE on which our project runs. It's basically a simulator's EXE which loads and runs our website. Our website is packaged in the form of ZIP file.
Deletes existing ZIP file.
Creates a new ZIP file which will contain some folders like "html", "lsp" (Lua Server Pages), images, JS(which will contain only one merged file), CSS(which will contain only one CSS file).
Start the .EXE. Basically the EXE once loaded which pick up the zip file from a specified directory.
I understand, merging process can be achieved via gruntJS, but I am not sure about starting/killing the EXE. It would be great if somebody gives me pointers how to get started. Once being certain about the process, I can convince my boss.
Thanks for reading.
Having a grunt-like script that launch your server isn't good practice. In an ideal world, you would separate the build and package phase from the launch of the server.
But anyway, there are either grunt plugins to do that, or the vanilla child_process of node, assuming you use node to run grunt.
Using grunt-exec it would look like this:
exec: {
start_server: {
command: 'program.exe'
}
}
Using the vanilla approach:
var spawn = require('child_process').spawn;
prog = spawn('program.exe');
prog.on('close', function (returnCode) {
console.log('program.exe terminated with code', returnCode);
});
I have my JavaScript organized as described here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/10816983/83897.
I have a JavaScript-heavy ASP.NET application that has multiple different pages (vs. being a single-page application). Each page has different dependencies, so I have a per-page .js file (page1.js, page2.js, etc.). Each has a require() call, declaring its dependencies:
require(['jquery', 'page1Module'], function($, module){
// page1 specific stuff here
});
This works fine. What I'm wondering is, how might the RequireJS build process work? I think I want a per-page "build" .js file (e.g. page1-build.js, page2-build.js, etc.)? Is there existing software I can leverage?
The process might look like this:
Compile all dependencies for a given script into one build.js file in a temporary directory.
Calculate an MD5 fingerprint for the compiled file.
Compare that fingerprint with the comparable file in public/assets.
Create an in-memory RequireJS manifest, mapping each module to the compiled file. Append this manifest to the compiled file.
Somehow make production use the build file.
EDIT: After some thought, I'm thinking the RequireJS optimization using node + r.js will just be part of a larger asset building process, where the asset building relies on some other, third-party library. The RequireJS optimization will simply be used for certain JavaScript dependencies (i.e. the JavaScript files for each page, including found dependencies), perhaps specified in some XML config.
You can create multiple optimized files by specifing the modules in the build profile:
{
modules: [
{
name: "main"
},
{
name: "page1",
include: ["dep1", "shim2"],
exclude: ["main"]
}]
}
Each entry will generate a optmized .js file.
More info here: How to use RequireJS build profile + r.js in a multi-page project