Remove "jQuery" variable name
Closed this issue · 6 comments
Many micro libraries have cropped up in the last year, all of them claiming some level of compatibility with jQuery, but none of them actually use the jQuery variable - because they are not jQuery. Using the jQuery Identifier variable is misleading to end developers and misrepresents your project as a simple drop-in replacement for jQuery, while also tacitly implying an endorsement by jQuery and/or jQuery core developers, which is not the case. We are taking the task of exploring approaches to reduce jQuery's size very seriously (Building A Slimmer jQuery, File Size Considerations ), but I think that distributing your own library with the name "jQuery" in it will only serve to confuse users, who will only be getting something that's "mostly like" the window.jQuery they're used to - if it is indeed your intention to actually have people use jQuip. If, as you mention in the readme, you're only doing this project to "measure the demand" for "jQuery into organizing its code to be more modular," you can be assured that we're already well aware of the demand, and are investigating ways to achieve that end without slashing the functionality jQuery's users expect.
Well firstly I'll definitely be retiring this project and provide a link to an officially sanctioned modular jQuery as soon as one is available.
Note: Initially the jQuery variable wasn't being set but I have since received multiple requests to assign it, as they want to be able to make use of the adhoc jQuery extension/plugin that references it.
At the same time it's a feature designed to make their lives easier when using other plugins and extensions, of course since jquip isn't a 100% feature complete jQuery not all plugins will work as expected - but a lot possibly will (if they only stick to the core functionality). Personally the more beneficial option for users would be to leave it in there (since it is actually a user requested feature) and just deprecate the project when jQuery releases a replacement solution. I don't see the harm in it (if its just a messaging/communication issue) as devs who choose to use to use jquip obviously aren't using jQuery in the same solution. Removing the jQuery variable effectively prohibits the use of external plugins/extensions.
But If you really want me to remove the variable I will? personally I think a better approach would be to put a disclaimer message on the home page that this is a transitional project and point to an official post that notifies everyone of jQuery's plans. On that front, the File Size considerations thread sounds a lot more promising than the official "Building A Slimmer jQuery" post (I already had read) which to be honest I don't believe goes far enough, there's no mention of being able to use the Closure Compiler to be able to strip out dead code (i.e. 1 step better than a modular jQuery) or the possibility to remove old IE support - without this you're just trimming a fat cat, and are not making jQuery more palatable for use-cases that are looking into alternative solutions, i.e. like this one.
it's called jquip. people should be smart enough to know the difference. lets move on, cause nobody cares if it declares a jQuery var or not.
nobody cares if it declares a jQuery var or not.
Actually, some people do care. Myself included. You have to remember that, because of jQuery's incredibly low barrier-to-entry, there are many people using it that simply don't understand its inner workings, and would be hard-pressed to see the crucial technical differences between jquip and the official jQuery.
It's very easy to imagine someone using jquip, finding a bug, and because they believe it's affiliated, technically, with jQuery, they report the bug to the jQuery bug team, when in fact it isn't a bug with jQuery, but with jquip.
I like the idea of jquip, and a more modular approach. It would make more sense, from an identify POV, to rename all instances of the word "jQuery" to "jquip".
IMO, It would be fine to keep the var as is if jquip was in fact a live, continually merged, fork (with auto-modularisation) of the official jQuery but this isn't the case.
@padolsey I think you need to have a very low opinion of devs if you think that if they find an issue with jquip that they'll be reporting it to jQuery.com. I find it hard to imagine a scenario for devs who would use jquip not be able to tell the difference between the two projects.
I've already added a disclaimer on the home page that jquip's not affiliated to jQuery.
https://github.com/mythz/jquip/
I'm happy to remove the jQuery variable when I get an official response from jQuery.com that I can reference. Do you work for jQuery?
"I'm happy to remove the jQuery variable when I get an official response from jQuery.com that I can reference. Do you work for jQuery?"
Filing this issue was us politely asking you to remove the jQuery assignment.
@rwldrn Well I wouldn't exactly call the tone of your post polite, but whatever - I'll change it.