Jetpack SDK 0.1 release candidate #1 is out!

[Atul Varma]

Hi everyone,

We've just released the first release candidate of the Jetpack SDK
0.1. You can get it here if you're interested; pick your favorite
compression format:

https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/labs/jetpack/jetpack-sdk-0.1rc1.tar.gz
https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/labs/jetpack/jetpack-sdk-0.1rc1.zip

Right now, this SDK is for people who know how to use a command-line
shell, as the development tools are only usable from there. We're also
working on a web-based development environment called FlightDeck that
will make it even easier to collaborate and build real Firefox
extensions, in the spirit of the original Jetpack Prototype's user
interface--but that's not ready quite yet.

You'll also need Python 2.5 or later on your system to get started:

http://www.python.org/

Once you've got that, just unpack the zip file (or tarball) and check
out the README.txt file to get started.

We'd love to know of any feedback you have for this release. Feel free
to post them to this Google Group, or file a bug on Bugzilla. We've
already discovered a few that are blocking the release of 0.1, so this
won't be the last RC--the tracking bug for launch is here:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=549017

Thanks!

- Atul, on behalf of Team Jetpack

[Luca Greco]

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Atul Varma <ava...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> We've just released the first release candidate of the Jetpack SDK
> 0.1. You can get it here if you're interested; pick your favorite
> compression format:
>
>  https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/labs/jetpack/jetpack-sdk-0.1rc1.tar.gz
>  https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/labs/jetpack/jetpack-sdk-0.1rc1.zip
>
> Right now, this SDK is for people who know how to use a command-line
> shell, as the development tools are only usable from there. We're also
> working on a web-based development environment called FlightDeck that
> will make it even easier to collaborate and build real Firefox
> extensions, in the spirit of the original Jetpack Prototype's user
> interface--but that's not ready quite yet.

I've just finished to read the documentation, after my first successful
"cfx docs"

As a Javascript and XUL developer I started to follow jep-28 mercurial repo
sometimes ago... our (Mozilla) platform is a step forward to be a commonjs
compliant environment, I'm very happy with XULRunner but I think a commonjs
web/desktop development environment could be a "killer application" in our
near future ;-)

awesome work!

Thank you very much Atul

I'll start experimenting asap

--
Luca Greco @ Alca Società Cooperativa
Follow me on http://twitter.com/lucagreco

[Aza]

Congratulations to everyone on the team. This is a huge milestone.

There hero of this release is Atul. Go Atul!

-- aza | ɐzɐ --

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mozilla-labs-jetpack" group.
To post to this group, send email to mozilla-la...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mozilla-labs-jet...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla-labs-jetpack?hl=en.

[Hernan Rodriguez Colmeiro]

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 01:42, Aza <aza...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Congratulations to everyone on the team. This is a huge milestone.
> There hero of this release is Atul. Go Atul!

Yeah, Atul FTW! Congrats to all of the reboot team! I hope I can give
you some feedback in the near future, and I'm really looking forward
for FligthDeck!!

Hernán

[Atul Varma]

Thanks guys! :)

Lucas, I definitely agree with you in regards to having a CommonJS-
based web/desktop development platform. While we're focusing on making
the platform awesome for Firefox extensions right now, we're making
sure we don't limit the possibility of desktop apps. In fact, some of
the extensions I'm already making with the Jetpack SDK--I'll post a
link to my personal package repo in a few days--actually work both as
standalone XULRunner apps and as Firefox/Thunderbird extensions. It's
pretty cool to see what you can do when you decouple things the right
way.

- Atul

On Feb 26, 9:11 pm, Hernan Rodriguez Colmeiro <colme...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Irakli Gozalishvili]

Congratulations!! Great step forward for Mozilla in providing a app platform in general. I think I'll start porting narwhal-xulrunner modules any time soon for things that are not there yet!


--
Irakli Gozalishvili
Web: http://rfobic.wordpress.com/
Phone: +31 614 205275
Address: Taksteeg 3 - 4, 1012PB Amsterdam, Netherlands

[sabret00the]

Congratulations.

On Feb 27, 12:59 am, Atul Varma <ava...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> We've just released the first release candidate of the Jetpack SDK
> 0.1. You can get it here if you're interested; pick your favorite
> compression format:
>

>  https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/labs/jetpack/jetpack-sdk-0.1r...
>  https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/labs/jetpack/jetpack-sdk-0.1r...

[Atul Varma]

Awesome Irakli, that would be super helpful. :)

Thanks!

- Atul

> > mozilla-labs-jet...@googlegroups.com<mozilla-labs-jetpack%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

[Marcio Galli]

Hi Atul - this is awesome work. A few weeks ago I started learning a bit more about Cuddlefish and the inner parts of Jetpack and loved specifically how simple and organized is the Cuddlefish lab stuff.

I wonder if you envision the SDK to be used also by apps that wants to offer the Loader functional aspects to their own scripts. This is exactly my case - I am workig in a kiosk kind of app that render widgets from the Web ( JS-Based code  that access the kiosk DOM ). From what I looked quickly ( sorry in case this exists already ) I was able to create a program, but not able to use the provided functions to make my program execute programs from the Web.

Thanks a bunch for this work!

/\/\

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mozilla-labs-jet...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla-labs-jetpack?hl=en.

--
blog.taboca.com

[Christoph Dorn]

Can we please review how narwhal-xulrunner fits into the
jetpack/cuddlefish environments.

I would like to leverage jetpack and cuddlefish from and for the
narwhal-xulrunner engine where possible.

I see two primary use-cases:

1) Use jetpacks from within narwhal to encapsulate pluggable functionality

2) Use narwhal from within jetpacks to enable securable narwhal-based
programs

The current design provides a narwhal runtime extension that bootstraps
narwhal once and enables extensions to create their own narwhal
sandboxes. The reason for one runtime extension vs bundling with every
extension is to reduce bootstrapping overhead and nsINarwhal component
and narwhal library version conflicts.

My preference would be to bundle narwhal with each extension (I don't
think the bootstrapping overhead is significant) and it makes it very
easy to use a patched narwhal library if need be.

Atul, what are your thoughts on how we can/should leverage
cuddlefish/jetpack for narwhal-xulrunner?

Christoph

>>>> Hern�n

[Irakli Gozalishvili]

Hi Chris,

I do think the jetpack does more or less what I wanted to do with narwhal-xulrunner but it relays more on the xulrunner specifig sugar and less abstractions layers. It was my idea for a next face with narwhal-xulrunner, but because of the timing issues it newer happened. I do think it's good idea to take advantage of the work done by jetpack team, and build narwhal-xulrunner on top of Cuddlefish.

I have no clear picture yet, but I'm planning to look at it during this weekend.

Honestly I don't see there is a point of extensions when there is a jetpack, IMO mozilla should've implement it back in 1.0.

 

--
Irakli Gozalishvili
Web: http://rfobic.wordpress.com/
Phone: +31 614 205275
Address: Taksteeg 3 - 4, 1012PB Amsterdam, Netherlands

Atul Varma wrote:

Hernán

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"mozilla-labs-jetpack" group.
To post to this group, send email to mozilla-la...@googlegroups.com
.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mozilla-labs-jet...@googlegroups.com<mozilla-labs-jetpack%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla-labs-jetpack?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mozilla-labs-jetpack" group.
To post to this group, send email to mozilla-la...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mozilla-labs-jet...@googlegroups.com.

[Irakli Gozalishvili]

BTW @atul I have been thinking of looking at the sdk and exploring idea of running it using narwhal-xulrunner (even ported to the Cuddlefish) itself which I believe would be really cool. I was running jack on top of xulrunner, actually I used firefox instead and I think it can handle everythink that is done by python in jetpack-sdk.

Idea of running jetpack-sdk on top of jetpack iteslf gets me excited :P

what do you think ?

--
Irakli Gozalishvili
Web: http://rfobic.wordpress.com/
Phone: +31 614 205275
Address: Taksteeg 3 - 4, 1012PB Amsterdam, Netherlands

[David Illsley]

Hi,
I thought I'd give something simple a go and use the xhr Module from
jetpack-core. However, when I do so with:
package.json:
{
"description": "This is my first package, it's tiny.",
"author": "Me (http://me.org)",
"main":"my-module",
"dependencies": ["jetpack-core"]
}
my-module.js:
exports.main = function(options, callbacks) {
console.log("Hello World!");
var req = new xhr.XMLHttpRequest();
console.log(req);
callbacks.quit("OK");
}

I get the following error:
$ cfx run
info: Hello World!
ReferenceError: xhr is not defined
(file:///Users/davidillsley/Downloads/jep-28-0.1rc1/packages/jetpack-core/lib/securable-module.js
-> resource://my-first-package-my-first-package-lib/my-module.js:3)
stack:
([object Object],[object
Object])@file:///Users/davidillsley/Downloads/jep-28-0.1rc1/packages/jetpack-core/lib/securable-module.js
-> resource://my-first-package-my-first-package-lib/my-module.js:3
Harness_load()@file:///Users/davidillsley/Downloads/jep-28-0.1rc1/python-lib/cuddlefish/app-extension/components/harness.js:232
Harness_observe(null,"app-startup",null)@file:///Users/davidillsley/Downloads/jep-28-0.1rc1/python-lib/cuddlefish/app-extension/components/harness.js:257

FAIL
Total time: 0.725064 seconds
Program terminated unsuccessfully.
(jep-28-0.1rc1)

Is this expected? Have I missed something obvious? Just a little too eager?
Thanks,
David

[Irakli Gozalishvili]

I gues  you need to do var xhr = require("jetpack-core/xhr");

or wherever your xhr module is.

--
Irakli Gozalishvili
Web: http://rfobic.wordpress.com/
Phone: +31 614 205275
Address: Taksteeg 3 - 4, 1012PB Amsterdam, Netherlands

[David Illsley]

D'oh. I thought I'd have missed something obvious.
It seems to be require("xhr") which does the magic.
Thanks,
David

[Christoph Dorn]

Irakli Gozalishvili wrote:
> BTW @atul I have been thinking of looking at the sdk and exploring idea
> of running it using narwhal-xulrunner (even ported to the Cuddlefish)
> itself which I believe would be really cool. I was running jack on top
> of xulrunner, actually I used firefox instead and I think it can handle
> everythink that is done by python in jetpack-sdk.
>
> Idea of running jetpack-sdk on top of jetpack iteslf gets me excited :P
>
> what do you think ?

I am all for a JS-only toolchain.

Christoph

[Christoph Dorn]

Irakli Gozalishvili wrote:
> I do think the jetpack does more or less what I wanted to do with
> narwhal-xulrunner but it relays more on the xulrunner specifig sugar and
> less abstractions layers. It was my idea for a next face with
> narwhal-xulrunner, but because of the timing issues it newer happened. I
> do think it's good idea to take advantage of the work done by jetpack
> team, and build narwhal-xulrunner on top of Cuddlefish.
>
> I have no clear picture yet, but I'm planning to look at it during this
> weekend.
>
> Honestly I don't see there is a point of extensions when there is a
> jetpack, IMO mozilla should've implement it back in 1.0.

I agree, but it is only here now and still under heavy development. We
need to continue supporting extensions until jetpack has matured.

I'll switch to jetpack exclusively once I can do everything I can do
with extensions.

Christoph

[Luca Greco]

I'm just started to experiment on the jetpack sdk:

http://bitbucket.org/rpl/rpl-on-jetpack/src/tip/packages/001-catch-xulrunner-startup/README.md

on my platform (Linux) I notice main function called twice with the
simplest hello wold, and only
using the 'observer-service' it will be called once.

How it work on the other platforms?

[Andrew Sutherland]

On 03/04/2010 02:14 PM, Luca Greco wrote:
> I'm just started to experiment on the jetpack sdk:
>
> http://bitbucket.org/rpl/rpl-on-jetpack/src/tip/packages/001-catch-xulrunner-startup/README.md
>
> on my platform (Linux) I notice main function called twice with the
> simplest hello wold, and only
> using the 'observer-service' it will be called once.
>
> How it work on the other platforms?

You should be able to define NO_EM_RESTART in your environment to avoid
this as a workaround, but it may be deficient; I am not totally sure
what the extension manager gets up to that makes (it think) a restart is
required. I believe the cuddlefish harness hooks a phase of execution
that occurs before/around the same time the extension manager decides to
restart the system after having seen new extensions. Your example, by
deferring full execution to a point that never happens in the
extension-manager-initiated restart case, addresses the problem. This
should probably happen on all platforms.

Andrew

[Luca Greco]

Hi Andrew,
I made a test with the new "-P" cfx option to understand why main run twice:
because EM restart the engine or because "cfx run" by default create a
new "random name" profile... or both? :-D

== CONSOLE OUTPUT
(jetpack-sdk)rpl@sheldon:001-catch-xulrunner-startup$ NO_EM_RESTART=1
cfx run -b /opt/firefox/firefox

(firefox-bin:5282): GLib-WARNING **: g_set_prgname() called multiple times
info: Hello World!
OK

(firefox-bin:5282): GLib-WARNING **: g_set_prgname() called multiple times
info: Hello World!
OK
Total time: 1.246486 seconds
Program terminated successfully.
(jetpack-sdk)rpl@sheldon:001-catch-xulrunner-startup$ cfx run -b
/opt/firefox/firefox -P ~/existent_profile_path

(firefox-bin:5304): GLib-WARNING **: g_set_prgname() called multiple times
info: Hello World!
OK
Total time: 0.380063 seconds
Program terminated successfully.
========================

Did I use NO_EM_RESTART correctly? why using an existent profile it
doesn't restart?
did main run before a profile even exists?