Message from discussion Making browsers faster: Resource Packages
From: Magne Andersson <zirroz...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Making browsers faster: Resource Packages
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:24:26 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1258453466 25378 127.0.0.1 (17 Nov 2009 10:24:26 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:24:26 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com; posting-host=22.214.171.124;
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; sv-SE; rv:126.96.36.199)
Gecko/20091102 Firefox/3.5.5 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
On 17 Nov, 11:17, Ictinus <icti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 9:00=A0pm, Magne Andersson <zirroz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 17 Nov, 10:55, Ictinus <icti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think I'd rather not have to unzip/edit/re-zip every time I modify =
> > > resource (oops someone forgot to zip!) Especially when the resources
> > > in question are not maintained in a file system.
> > > eg. IBM/Lotus Domino holds the resources within another file structur=
> > > (.nsf)
> > > I would much prefer to have the server dish up a single (cached)
> > > gzipped, minified resource to the browser.
> > > Seewww.dominoexperts. com/dapInfo
> > Well, obviously, you wouldn't include a frequently edited resource in
> > the ZIP, but most sites have their resources static for quite a long
> > time.
> I agree, perhaps a ZIP file would be useful in the short term, but a
> server managed solution long term would allow all resources to get the
> performance benefit.
> Not having to manage the zip file makes a developers life easier.
> Having it server side means more benefit. After all we already do gzip
> server side.
I don't think you understood what I meant, I said that this solution
is great for resources that doesn't update frequently. This is also
made to eliminate requests, GZIP doesn't do that. It just makes the