NOTE: I neither use nor maintain this project anymore.
There are a lot of tools that accomplish very similar things in this space. Pinion is meant to be a very simple and lightweight solution. It is driven by these core goals (bold goals are implemented):
- Simple configuration and usage.
- No added syntax to your assets (e.g. no
//= require my_other_asset)
- Recompile all compiled assets when they change (or dependencies change) in development and set mtimes
- Recompile asynchronously from requests (no polling allowed)
- Compile assets one time in production
$ gem install pinion
You should add pinion to your project's Gemfile.
Pinion is intended to be easy to set up and use with any Rack app, and even simpler with Sinatra.
Pinion provides helpers to make it interact well with Sinatra. In your app:
and your config.ru:
require "your_app.rb" map YourApp.pinion.mount_point do run YourApp.pinion end map "/" do run YourApp end
If you're not using Sinatra, the easiest way to use Pinion is to create and mount a
Pinion provides some helpers to help you construct links for assets.
<head> <title>My App</title> <link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="<%= pinion.asset_url("/assets/style.css") %>" /> <%# Shorthand equivalent %> <%= pinion.css_url("style.css") %> </head>
This assumes that you have the
Pinion::Server instance available inside your app as
pinion. If you're
using Sinatra and
Pinion::SinatraHelpers, then the helpers are available right in your app's scope:
<%= css_url("style.css") %>
In production, you may wish to concatenate and minify your assets before you serve them. This is done through
using asset bundles. Pinion provides a predefined bundle type,
:concatenate_and_uglify_js, for your
You will create bundles when you set up your
pinion.create_bundle(:main_bundle, :concatenate_and_uglify_js, ["app.js", "util.js", "jquery.js"])
In this case,
:main_bundle is an identifier for this bundle, and will the name under which this bundle is
served. In your view, you will use the bundle similarly to how you use the
<%= js_bundle(:main_bundle) %>
In development, the individual
<script> tags for each asset will be emitted; in production, a single
main-bundle.js) will be produced.
:concatenate_and_uglify_js bundle type simply concatenates JS files and runs them through
Uglifier. No default CSS bundle type is provided (but the built-in Sass
conversion type emits minified code in production, and typically you'll let Sass/Less/Stylus handle
concatenation for you).
You can define your own bundle types and their behavior if you like:
# The block is passed an array of `Pinion::Asset`s; it should return the content # of the bundled files. Pinion::BundleType.create(:concatenate_js_only) do |assets| # Demo code only; you need to be a bit more careful in reality. See the # definition of :concatenate_and_uglify_js for hints. assets.map(&:contents).join("\n") end
Note that in production mode, asset URLs will have the md5sum of the asset inserted into them:
<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="/assets/style-698f462d2f43890597ae78df8286d03f.css" /> <script src="/assets/test-bundle-cd94852076ffa13c006cf575dfff9e35.js"></script>
and these assets are served with long (1-year) expiry, for good cacheability.
You can see an example app using Pinion and Sinatra in the
example/ directory. This app shows serving some
static and compiled assets as well as a simple asset bundle. Run
bundle install in that directory to get the
necessary gems, then run it:
rackup config.ru # Development mode RACK_ENV=production rackup config.ru # Production mode
- Currently, Pinion sidesteps the dependency question by invalidating its cache of each file of a particular
type (say, all
.scssfiles) when any such source file is changed.
- The order that paths are added to the watch list is a priority order in case of conflicting assets. (For
foo/bazare both on the watch list, and both of the files
foo/bar/style.scsswill be used if a request occurs for
- If you don't use the url helpers provided by Pinion and instead just serve assets with a plain url (that is, without a checksum in the url), Pinion will serve the assets with 10-minute expiry in the Cache-Control header. In general, you should try to serve all your assets by using the urls given by the helpers.
Why not use Sprockets?
You should! Sprockets is a great project. Pinion is a smaller project than Sprockets, and it does fewer things. I made Pinion because I'm not using Rails (the Rails integration is where Sprockets really shines) and because some of the design choices that Sprockets makes don't really fit my ideal workflow. Here are a few things that Pinion does differently:
Conversions are defined from one filetype to another (e.g.
:scss => :css), not by the chain of file extensions (e.g.
foo.css.scss). I like the asset manager to follow the file naming scheme, not the other way around.
It's very easy to define your own conversions instead of using the built-in ones (and this is expected, as Pinion only comes with a few of them). This makes it very simple to customize the behavior for your own needs. Want to output minified css in production but a human-readable version in dev? This is easy to do (and this is the default behavior of the built-in sass/scss converters).
To support concatenation, Sprockets uses special directives in comments at the beginning of files (e.g.
//= require jquery) to specify dependencies between files. To my mind, this is not desirable because:
- It's easier to debug in development if the files aren't all concatenated together.
- Other systems (say, a node.js-based JS test runner) don't understand these dependencies.
- How you bundle assets is mostly a caching/performance concern separate from your app logic, so it doesn't necessarily make sense to tie them together. For instance, you may wish to bundle together your vendored JS separately from your application JS if you expect the latter to change much more frequently.
In contrast, Pinion bundles are created by using the
*_bundlemethods in your app server (view) code, which (in my opinion) is much more obvious behavior.
This being said, you should certainly consider using Sprockets if it fits into your project. It is a very established project that powers the Rails asset pipeline, and it has great support for a wide variety of conversion types. If you use both, let me know what you think!
- Alek Storm (alekstorm)
Pinion is released under the MIT License.