Thanks everyone for feedback. I think it's a good idea to send this to the
technical board to reach a consensus. Here is the summary as I see it:
Benefits of jQuery 2:
* Smaller file size (36KB or 11KB for minified version)
* "Faster" -- not sure this has any practical benefit currently, but might
be helpful if rewriting the filter widgets which are notoriously slow [1])
Cons:
* No built-in IE6-8 support for admin JavaScript features
Pros of doing it now:
* Discourages use of old, unsupported browsers.
* It's bunched with other admin changes like the redesign and dropping
fallback images for IE6/7 support (for no transparent png support by these
browsers).
* "1.9 is the release following an LTS -- the perfect time for changes such
as JQuery 2 and dropping support for old browsers. If developers need to
support the legacy IE8, they can use Django 1.8." -Shai
* Possible to restore compatibility by overriding the admin's jQuery with
an older version of jQuery with an app that looks like this:
admin-jquery-1/static/admin/js/vendor/
jquery.js
jquery.min.js
jQuery 1.X and 2.X have API compatibility so this technique should work for
the foreseeable future.
Cons:
* IE8 won't be EOL until ~1 month after the release of 1.9.
* Workaround technique could be annoying for affected users.
[1] https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/15220
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 12:00:36 PM UTC-4, Collin Anderson wrote:
>
> To be clear: jQuery 1.x and 2.x are the exact same except for IE < 9
> compatibility. jQuery v1.11.3 and v2.1.4, released simultaneously, _are_
> the latest version of jQuery. It's not like "1.11.x" is an "old" release
> series. 1.x and 2.x have the exact same features and API and are 100%
> compatible with each other. The _only_ difference is that v2.1.4 is
> slightly smaller because it doesn't have shims to support IE6-8 (and a few
> other old browsers).
>
> The only advantage to switching to 2.x is a slightly smaller file size,
> meaning a slightly quicker load time.
>
> In a few months, they'll switch to 3.x, breaking some backwards
> compatibility, and instead of 2.x and 1.x, they'll have "jQuery" and
> "jQuery Compat" with the same version numbers. That should make this more
> clear.
>
> http://blog.jquery.com/2015/07/13/jquery-3-0-and-jquery-compat-3-0-alpha-versions-released/
>
> I personally suggest staying with jQuery Compat (1.x) through this next
> LTS cycle. The file size is really not that much, and it shouldn't be any
> extra work to maintain.
> https://mathiasbynens.be/demo/jquery-size
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/32a77996-4193-4730-bf22-6613df44b56b%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
