<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 8 Jun 2015, at 19:42, Ricordisamoa <<a href="mailto:ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org" class="">ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">Il 08/06/2015 14:58, Yuvi Panda ha scritto:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Ricordisamoa<br class=""><<a href="mailto:ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org" class="">ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Il 01/05/2015 10:02, Ricordisamoa ha scritto:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Thank you SO MUCH!<br class="">Out of curiosity, how does it compare to the 'old' static? Is the latter<br class="">supposed to be deprecated at some point?<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Any answers to this question?<br class=""></blockquote>Not sure - the owners of the static tool should respond, maybe? the<br class="">CDNJS one is certainly faster than /static was (no NFS dependency).<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Is it advisable/worth to migrate tools from /static to CDNJS?<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Yes. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">At the very least make sure you're referencing static assets from <a href="http://tools-static.wmflabs.org" class="">tools-static.wmflabs.org</a>.</div><div class="">That way the requests are cached better in your browsers, and there's no cookies being sent back and forth.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Both 'static' and 'cdnjs' are on this server now.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">E.g. <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/static-browser/show/bootstrap" class="">https://tools.wmflabs.org/static-browser/show/bootstrap</a> advertises:</div><div class=""><link rel="stylesheet" href="//<a href="http://tools-static.wmflabs.org/static/bootstrap/3.2.0/css/bootstrap.min.css" class="">tools-static.wmflabs.org/static/bootstrap/3.2.0/css/bootstrap.min.css</a>"></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/cdnjs/" class="">https://tools.wmflabs.org/cdnjs/</a> points to:</div><div class=""><a href="https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/cdnjs/ajax/libs/twitter-bootstrap/3.3.4/css/bootstrap.min.css" class="">https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/cdnjs/ajax/libs/twitter-bootstrap/3.3.4/css/bootstrap.min.css</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">As for comparing static-browser to cdnjs.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* cdnjs is loaded from local disk instead of NFS. So web requests are handled faster.</div><div class="">* cdnjs is loaded by an upstream community dedicated to the task. Updates are much faster and more libraries are available.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-- Krinkle</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>