WordPress.org

Forums

A smaller footprint for WordPress, and a developer copy. (7 posts)

  1. ianatkins
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Hi All,

    Normally I wouldn't be disgruntled about uploading WordPress's 8mb to a webserver, but currently I'm working abroad on shoddy internet connections, and I couldn't help but notice the slow upload.

    It got me thinking that it would be lovely if WordPress was a bit lighter. Digging into the files it seems that two copies of files are provided. One compressed, and another for people wanting to view the uncompressed source code.

    Can I suggest providing two downloads, one for Dev's which includes uncompressed source code, another for deployment which is parred back. In the deployment version the following could be employed:

    Minify all JS files (most are) e.g.
    wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery.serialize-object.js

    Compressing CSS files (most are) e.g.
    wp-includes/js/jcrop/jquery.jcrop.css

    Removing .dev unminified JS versions e.g.
    wp-includes/js/admin-bar.dev.js

    Removing dev CSS files e.g.
    wp-admin/css/colors-classic-rtl.dev.css

    Removing Comments and line breaks from PHP files.

    Even if this only shaves 1/2 MB off the file size, multiply that saving by the millions of people that download and use wordpress and there's some serious computing powered saved. Gigabytes on servers world wide, less network traffic and ultimately less energy consumption. All of which has surely got to be worth an extra download option, with an uncompressed version for developers who want to dig a little deeper.

    I'd be interested to hear peoples thoughts, and please do reply if you think this has traction. I'd also happy to help make this happen if I can be of use!

    Kind Regards,

    Ian.

  2. WordPress's 8mb

    WordPress is JUST over 3mb (I just downloaded it to be sure), and work is being done to keep it small. But no, due to the nature of open source and how anyone can work on it, it's not going to have a dev version and a user version.

  3. ianatkins
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    10.7 MB

    Uncompressed, which is still relevant given that's how its used.

    For it being open source, I don't see how having two versions of releases impedes that. jQuery for example does exactly that.

    And it's a shame we can't have a discussion about this, without you placing an immediate no on the subject, surely community driven feedback is what drives open source, but that's your 2 cents given i guess.

  4. I'm saying 'no' cause this gets pitched about once or twice a month, and the devs have always said no. So really I'm not SAYING no, I'm telling you the answer I've seen for five years has been no, over and over again. :) Been there done that, got the t-shirt.

    No one wants to maintain both sets of releases, basically. There's not enough need for it to be an issue just yet. Of course that may change one day, but not today. If I can find the trac ticket about it, it would better explain the reasoning. This HAS been discussed quite a lot over the years, and thus far, there's been no compelling reason to do it.

    Heck, we folded WPMU into WordPress to stop having to have two releases. With code that's being continuously developed and worked on by hundreds of people at once, the comments let anyone pick up the code, change it, and move on. That benefit, thus far, outweighs the size complaint.

    At 10 megs uncompressed, it's still a pretty normal size for what it is. Drupal and Joomla are about the same these days. Heck, most people upload videos bigger than that today. 10 is nothing, and the devs are trying very hard to keep the size down.

  5. ianatkins
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Fair enough I missed those other discussions :)

    I don't do much work on a repository, but I'd imagine you'd maintain one master, and then just export two versions from the one code base. No extra maintenance work really. What repo system is being used?

    I might have a look into stripping the .dev files myself and will post file savings here if they are beneficial.

    Yeah appreciated 10mb isn't much, but its the product I most regularly consume, just be nice to make it a little leaner, and as I said multiplying small savings across a massive user base make it beneficial.

  6. I don't do much work on a repository, but I'd imagine you'd maintain one master, and then just export two versions from the one code base. No extra maintenance work really. What repo system is being used?

    SubVersion. Think of it as constant development, though. No one checks out files, edits, and checks in like on TFS or (god help me) PVCS. You take a file from trunk, edit it, create a diff, and put the diff in as a suggestion. Then if they like your code, the diff is merged in.

    Open source is a VERY different process from how most companies with a set number of staffers do things. Anyone can make a diff file, but only certain people can commit the changes. This flies in the face of how my office does things, for sure! :D Imagine thousands of coders, but only a dozen or so quality control checkers who approve the changes, if that helps. Because those thousands need constant, immediate, access to the current code, and because trunk (which we test against) changes daily, we would loose dev-time to spin out two versions.

    It's really weird, if you're used to 'normal' development :) I tried explaining it to my boss and he shook his head and gave up, but we're trying it on a project just to see if it improves output for code that doesn't have strict deadlines on.

  7. hpguru
    Member
    Posted 4 years ago #

    In my opinion 10 MB is nothing. WordPress is good anyway. :)

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Topic