We Keep Coding

Incorrect images path in public folder

This is structure of my (vanilla js) app:
├─ assets/
│ ├─images
│ │ ├─first/
│ │ │ ├image1.png
│ │ │ ├image2.png
│ │ │ ├... etc
│ │ ├─second/
│ │ ├─third/
├─ node_modules/
├─ public/
│ ├─ assets/
│ ├─ index.html
├─ index.html
├─ main.js
├─ style.scss
├─ package.json
Everything works fine untill I run build, then path of my images is gone and every single image is in same publics direction:
├─ dist/
│ ├─ assets/
│ │ ├first.jpg
│ │ ├second.jpg
│ ├─ index.html
so paths from my dev environment are incorrect in public. Is there a possibility to keep my dev path structure after build?
Ant another issue - for some reason, on build project includes slash to script and styles, so my public html files have no scripts and styles, I have to remove it by myself.
Here is vite config file:
export default {
build: {
outDir: 'public',
rollupOptions: {
input: {
main: './index.html',
about: './about.html',
contact: './contact.html',
design: './design.html',
innovation: './innovation.html',
media: './media.html',
spaceline: './spaceline.html',
ucsl88: './uc-sl-88.html',
ucsl120: './uc-sl-120.html',
ucsl150: './uc-sl-150.html',
}
}
}
}
Thanks

Share common dependencies between contexts

Premise
Let's say I have two different AMD-based AngularJS apps, each of them with their own sets of controllers, directives, services, etc. Each of them are bundled in their own dist/{app-name}.min.js and loaded in <script> tags in the same HTML page (this is all in the context of a CMS that then contains these apps among other things)
Now the apps end up sharing some of the services, directives, and vendor libraries like angular itself, moment, jQuery, etc, so I've made another folder for all of these resources, which results in a bundle that will be added to the page before the js bundles of the apps:
<script src="/some-path/dist/shared-resources.min.js"></script>
<script src="/some-path/dist/first-app.min.js"></script>
<script src="/some-path/dist/second-app.min.js"></script>
This is the resulting folder structure:
.
├── shared-resources/
│ ├── dist/
│ ├── src/
│ │ └── common/
│ │ ├── directives/
│ │ ├── modules/
│ │ ├── services/
│ │ └── vendor/
│ └── build.js
│
├── first-app
│ ├── dist/
│ ├── src/
│ │ ├── first-app/
│ │ │ ├── controllers/
│ │ │ ├── modules/
│ │ │ ├── services/
│ │ │ ├── directives/
│ │ │ └── app.js
│ │ └── first-app.js
│ └── build.js
│
└── second-app
├── dist/
├── src/
│ ├── second-app/
│ │ ├── controllers/
│ │ ├── modules/
│ │ ├── services/
│ │ ├── vendor/
│ │ └── app.js
│ └── second-app.js
└── build.js
This is an example of what the build.js file for the common modules looks like
({
baseUrl: 'src',
removeCombined: true,
out: 'dist/shared-resources.min.js',
paths: { // forcing a `common/{modulename}` convention
'common/jquery': 'common/vendor/jquery.min',
'common/moment': 'common/vendor/moment.min',
'common/angular': 'common/vendor/angular/angular.min',
},
shim: {
'common/angular': {
exports: 'angular',
}
},
include: [
'common/modules/vendors', // Just a bundle of every vendor modules
'common/directives/common-directive',
'common/services/common-service'
],
})
Now my intention was to have all the shared modules being namespaced with common/, so each of the apps could require common/angular, common/directives/common-directive, and so on, and then exclude the common path when creating their bundle (since all the common modules are already present in the shared-resources.js bundle), for example:
// first-app/src/first-app/controllers/app-controller.js
define([
'first-app/modules/controllers',
'first-app/services/app-service',
'common/services/common-service'
], function (controllers) {
'use strict';
controllers.controller('AppController', ['CommonService', 'AppService', function (CommonService, AppService) {
CommonService.call();
AppService.call();
}]);
});
// first-app/build.js
({
baseUrl: 'src',
out: 'dist/first-app.min.js',
paths: {
'common': 'empty:'
},
name: 'first-app',
deps: ['first-app/app']
})
Problem
The problem is how these two apps, which again are both loaded on the page (this can't be avoided), are supposed to correctly look up these common modules.
Given that each of the apps have obviously a different baseUrl, they are put in different RequireJS contexts, otherwise the baseUrl of the second app would override the baseUrl of the first one, causing the incorrect loading of its modules:
// first-app/src/first-app.js
require.config({
context: 'first-app',
baseUrl: 'first-app/src',
})(['fist-app/app']);
// first-app/src/second-app.js
require.config({
context: 'second-app',
baseUrl: 'second-app/src',
})(['second-app/app']);
But putting them in context then causes the look up for the common modules to fail, as the modules are looked in the baseUrl of the context. Actually this happens only for the second app (second in order of loading), while the first app to be included in the page can load the common modules fine
Question
So how should I make the apps to correctly share the common modules? Am I approaching this wrong? Should I use something else than RequireJS?

The context feature of RequireJS is really meant to be used to handle a case where you have to load two conflicting applications on the same page and the conflict cannot be resolved otherwise. The way you've written your code so far may have led you to want to have two baseUrl values, but there is nothing in your question that indicates that you must have two baseUrl values. There are ways to avoid it:
Modules that are part of a logical set of modules should load each other with relative paths. For instance, the module you give as example could be:
// first-app/src/first-app/controllers/app-controller.js
define([
'../modules/controllers',
'../services/app-service',
'common/services/common-service'
], function (controllers) {
paths can be set to make it look like a module is directly under baseUrl even if it is not. You could have:
paths: {
'first-app': 'first-app/src'
'second-app': 'second-app/src'
}
and yes, loading first-app/app will work. RequireJS will transform the path to first-app/src/app.js.

Require.js Build Optimization Configuration

I'm having a hard time getting the require.js build just right. I have a main module and then the other pages/modules are lazy loaded. When it's done compiling, I have to fix the compiled dist/main.js or the app will load the compiled main module from the dist folder, but other modules are still loaded from the app folder. I have to change the require.config baseurl from /app to /dist. What do I need to reconfigure to get it to build correctly?
Directory Structure
├── app
│ ├── modules
│ │ ├── example_module
│ │ ╰── another_module
│ │ ├── AnotherController.js
│ │ ╰── AnotherView.stache
│ ├── main.js
│ ╰── build.js
├── dist
│ ├── modules
│ │ ├── example_module
│ │ ╰── another_module
│ │ ╰── AnotherController.js
│ ╰── main.js
├── content
│ ├── css
│ │ ╰── main.css
│ ├── sass
│ │ ├── table.scss
│ │ ├── type.scss
│ │ ├── form.scss
│ │ ╰── main.scss
│ ╰── img
├── lib
│ ├── bootstrap
│ ╰── canjs
├── bower.json
├── gulpfile.js
├── package.json
├── README.md
╰── index.html
app/main.js
require.config({
baseUrl: '/app', // must change this after compilation!
paths: {
'jquery': '../lib/jquery/dist/jquery.min',
'jquery-easing': '../lib/jquery-easing-original/jquery.easing.1.3.min',
'jquery-throttle': '../lib/jquery-throttle-debounce/jquery.ba-throttle-debounce.min',
'jquery-inputmask': '../lib/jquery.inputmask/dist/jquery.inputmask.bundle.min',
'can': '../lib/canjs/amd/can',
'bootstrap': '../lib/bootstrap-sass-official/assets/javascripts/bootstrap',
...
},
shim: {
'jquery-easing': ['jquery'],
'jquery-throttle': ['jquery'],
'bootstrap': ['jquery']
...
}
});
require([...], function (...) {
// Init App
});
app/build.js
({
appDir: '.',
baseUrl: '.',
dir: '../dist',
mainConfigFile: 'main.js',
preserveLicenseComments: false,
modules: [
{
name: 'main',
include: [
'modules/dashboard/DashboardController',
...
]
},{
name: 'modules/example_module/ExampleController',
exclude: ['main']
},{
name: 'modules/another_module/AnotherController',
exclude: ['main']
},{
...
}
]
})

Interesting, I've actually not used this scenario with RequireJS, however this structure would make sense for bundles/progressively loading files.
What I've done in the past is one of two things:
1) Use the existing /app directory for progressively loaded modules. /dist would only contain main.js/css or output the minified files to the root(if it's only 1-2 files)
2) Re-create the entire structure with only necessary files inside /dist. For example: /dist/index.html, /dist/app/modules/*, /dist/main.js would all exist. This way you can copy the entire /dist contents to any deployment package you use, vs cherry-picking which files you'll need on a production server.
Typically, I've found #2 is more common in my experience.

Cant find Jquery UI dependencies using Bower, Jquery UI, and RequireJS

I am using Jquery UI, Bower, and RequireJS in a project and am having difficulty configuring Jquery UI with Require. Basically Jquery UI is trying to find its dependencies in the root directory, and not where they are located, giving me an error.
I understand as of 1.11 Jquery UI supports AMD and the documentation notes that it works with a directory like so:
├── index.html
├── js
│ ├── app.js
│ ├── jquery-ui
│ │ ├── accordion.js
│ │ ├── autocomplete.js
│ │ ├── button.js
│ │ ├── core.js
│ │ ├── datepicker.js
│ │ ├── dialog.js
│ │ └── ...
│ ├── jquery.js
│ └── require.js
However, using Bower, the directory is more like
├── index.html
├── js
│ ├── app.js
|── bower_componenents
│ ├── jquery-ui
│ │ ├── accordion.js
│ │ ├── autocomplete.js
│ │ ├── button.js
│ │ ├── core.js
│ │ ├── datepicker.js
│ │ ├── dialog.js
│ ├── jquery
│ │ ├── jquery.js
│ └── require
│ │ ├── require.js
How does one configure Require so that Jquery UI can find its dependencies?

I was able to get it partially working by aliasing bower_components with the path attribute in the requirejs config. But the internal jquery libs are assuming that all of the javascript files are lumped together in the same directory structure (relative references) so it still doesn't work.
I'm considering using Grunt to copy my dependencies under my js directory so that everything is on the same baseUrl. Not exactly ideal, but it would probably make it easier to use r.js or gulp later on.

I was just setting it up wrong. I got it working after changing my config file to
require.config({
shim: {
underscore: {
exports: '_'
},
backbone: {
deps: ['underscore', 'jquery'],
exports: 'Backbone'
},
backboneLocalstorage: {
deps: ['backbone'],
exports: 'Store'
},
paths: {
jquery: '../bower_components/jquery/dist/jquery',
'jquery-ui': '../bower_components/jquery-ui/jquery-ui',
underscore: '../bower_components/underscore/underscore',
backbone: '../bower_components/backbone/backbone',
backboneLocalstorage: '../bower_components/backbone.localStorage/backbone.localStorage',
moment: '../bower_components/moment/moment',
text: '../bower_components/requirejs-text/text'
}
});
require(['backbone', 'views/app-view', 'routers/router'],
function (Backbone, AppView, Workspace ) {
new Workspace();
Backbone.history.start();
new AppView();
});
and then defining in my backbone view like so
define([
'collections/todos-collection',
'views/todo-view',
'common',
'backbone',
'jquery',
'jquery-ui'
], function(Todos, TodoView, Common, Backbone, $){
As you can see, jquery-ui will attach itself to the $ symbol.
Hope this helps.

Optimal directory structure for app -- node + dojo: would this work?

I am trying to work out the best directory structure for a small Dojo application (it's a basic booking system).
I am just about finished writing login/registration.
Here is what I have now:
.
├── app
│ ├── client
│ │ ├── JsonRest.js
│ │ ├── lib
│ │ │ ├── defaultSubmit.js
│ │ │ ├── globals.js
│ │ │ ├── globalWidgets.js
│ │ │ ├── Logger.js
│ │ │ └── stores.js
│ │ ├── login.js
│ │ ├── main.css
│ │ ├── main.js
│ │ ├── register.js
│ │ ├── rrl.css
│ │ ├── TODO.txt
│ │ ├── validators.js
│ │ └── widgets
│ │ ├── _AjaxValidatorMixin.js
│ │ ├── AlertBar.js
│ │ ├── AppMainScreen.js
│ │ ├── BusyButton.js
│ │ ├── css
│ │ │ └── AlertBar.css
│ │ ├── Dashboard.js
│ │ ├── LoginForm.js
│ │ ├── RegisterForm.js
│ │ ├── SearchPage.js
│ │ ├── StackFading.js
│ │ ├── _StackFadingMixin.js
│ │ ├── TabFading.js
│ │ ├── templates
│ │ │ ├── LoginForm.html
│ │ │ ├── RetypePassword.html
│ │ │ └── SearchPage.html
│ │ ├── ValidationEmail.js
│ │ ├── ValidationPassword.js
│ │ ├── ValidationUsername.js
│ │ ├── ValidationWorkspace.js
│ └── server
│ ├── AppErrorHandler.js
│ ├── auth.js
│ ├── db.js
│ ├── globals.js
│ ├── node_modules
│ │ ├── express
│ │ ├── jade
│ │ ├── mongodb
│ │ └── mongoose
│ ├── public
│ │ ├── app -> ../../client/
│ │ └── libs -> ../../../libs
│ ├── routes
│ │ └── routes.js
│ ├── server.js
│ ├── test.js
│ └── views
│ ├── index.jade
│ ├── login.jade
│ └── register.jade
├── libs
├── build-report.txt
├── dojo -> dojo-1.7.1
├── dojo-1.7.1
│ ├── app -> ../../app/client
│ ├── dijit
│ ├── dojox
│ ├── dojo
│ └── util
└── dojo-1.8.0
├── app -> ../../app/client
├── dijit
├── dojox
├── dojo
└── util
The idea behind it is that:
the "app" directory will be in a git repository somewhere (it's about time I make one, actually). It has the directories "client" (all the client-side code) and "server" (the node code).
In "libs" I will add things like dgrid, etc. I also noticed that Dojo 1.8 can be loaded within node (!). I will play with this later -- exciting!
Now, here you can see that I basically used symbolic links to make things work.
SERVER side: Under "public", I had symlinks to "app" and "libs". That way, I can access, from HTML, things like /libs/dojo/dojox/form/resources/BusyButton.css, or (important!) /libs/dojo/dojo/dojo.js and /app/main.js (which then instances AppMainScreen with a simple require(["app/widgets/AppMainScreen" ], function( AppMainScreen){ ...
CLIENT side: I have a symlink to the latest Dojo (my boilerplate still has a problem with Dojo 1.8, so I am still using 1.7 for now). However, in order to make this work within the app:
require(["app/widgets/AppMainScreen" ], function( AppMainScreen){
I have a symlink to "app" within Dojo.
Now: I realise the basics (I think the symlink to "app" within Dojo is solved by simply using DojoConfig, for example). But... well, this is my current 100% unoptimised, never built tree.
I can ask you guys give me the tick of approval for this tree? Will it work once I start "building" things? (I am still miles away from doing it, but I will eventually otherwise my [pregnant] wife will go crazy!). Avoiding that symlink to "app" is one of the things I think I should do (but then again, do I need to?).
Thank you!
Merc.

While not being a fan (nor knowledgable at all) of node, it looks to me as there's a huuge javascript library :)
I'd suggest You should really consider making a buildprofile and use the prefix key to set the location of your scripts. As result of a build, you would automatically get an 'app' folder coexisting with dojo,dijit,dojox.
Actually, i would suggest that once there is a separate repository for your dojo application layer, simply do the checkout within the SDK root, e.g. :
wget download.dojotoolkit.org/dojotoolkit-1.7.2-src.tar.gz -O djsrc.tar.gz && tar xfz djsrc.tar.gz && rm djsrc.tar.gz
cd dojotoolkit-1.7.2-src/
svn checkout http://example/mylibrary app
sh utils/buildscripts/build.sh --profile app/package.profile --release /var/nodejs/docroot/lib/
There is no harm at all in developing your app.widgets somewhere else then in your main document root (/lib). You could simply setup one global variable that tells loader where to look.
If built, nothing should be nescessary, but as far as your current tree goes, try something like this
<script>
var isDevelopement = true;
var dojoConfig = {
packages : (isDevelopement) ? [ name: 'app', location: '/app/client/' ] : []
}
</script>