Hi,

we are close to going-live of our project, and the customer is complaining a bit about the overall size of the included JS files.

Because we use (with some exceptions) only Ajax4JSF functions, we would like to try to exclude some of the Script Libraries in order to reduce the size of the Javascripts file. I know that it can cause components to break, but we would like to give it a try.

About script loading, we define in web.xml :

<context-param>
        <param-name>org.richfaces.LoadScriptStrategy</param-name>
        <param-value>ALL</param-value>
</context-param>
<context-param>
        <param-name>org.richfaces.ExcludeScripts</param-name>
        <param-value>Prototype,Scriptaculous</param-value>
</context-param>

Because of our "ALL" strategy, we get 2 JS files: framework.pack.js (311kB) and ui.pack.js (661kB). The strange thing is: The size doesn't change when I define the ExcludeScripts parameter.

Is it not possible to combine "ExcludeScripts" with "LoadScriptStrategy" of value "ALL"? We are using RF 3.3.3.FINAL with JSF2.0.2.

And by the way: As we are getting close to release of our platform, I want to thank the Richfaces Committers and Supporters for their excellent framework. Especially all the Ajax4JSF features have been a great value for us in the project, making it a lot easier to integrate Ajax functionality in JSF. Even that it's RF3 with JSF2, features like a4j:queue and a4j:jsFunction are still big benefits over standard JSF. Performance is also good for now, I hope that I have still the same opinion about it when we are live ;-)

Cheers,

Matthias