KOGITO-780: [DMN Designer] Ensure -runtime WAR is created with 'production' parameters

[manstis]

See https://issues.redhat.com/browse/KOGITO-780..

Basically I removed the draftCompile flag and a duplicate logLevel entry.

[tiagobento]

@manstis I think we should include <style>OBFUSCATED</style> and probably <optimizationLevel>9</optimizationLevel> as well.

[manstis]

@tiagobento Updates made as proposed.

[manstis]

@yesamer @romartin FYI these are the settings we're using for DMN... The -runtime WAR is ~64.6MB however WEB-INF is ~64.2MB (and excluded from the plugin) meaning the plugin itself is 0.4MB or ~400kb!

[manstis]

@yesamer @romartin Ignore the sizes I gave above... I was comparing oranges to apples.

[tiagobento]

@manstis on previous builds, DMN editor resources are ~26MB

[manstis]

@tiagobento What are "DMN editor resources"? The WAR? The exploded WAR less WEB-INF?

[manstis]

@tiagobento Do you have a tag/label that I can checkout to investigate? Nothing of any significance has been added explicitly to DMN to warrant a x3 size increase (-runtime WAR is now 66MB).

[tiagobento]

@manstis That's the exploded WAR less WEB-INF :)

[tiagobento]

@manstis https://github.com/kiegroup/kogito-online/tree/gh-pages/editors/0.2.6/dmn

[manstis]

@tiagobento It's 36MB with this PR...

[tiagobento]

@manstis I guess that's because there's gecko on the compilation targets? We only need chrome..

[manstis]

@tiagobento Correct... I finally found the difference (9MB for another permutation).

I'll update this PR to just compile Chrome.

[manstis]

@tiagobento ~26MB now :-)

[tiagobento]

@manstis Thx! Looks perfect now.

[manstis]

@jomarko New Year reminder to please review this PR :-)

[manstis]

Jenkins please retest this.

[jomarko]

Tried to build VS code extension, open and edit file. It works.

[romartin]

Just for my own reasoning - is that really true guys @manstis @ederign @porcelli ? For kogito webapps can we only expect support for safari engines? Is because our kogito channels are using only this implemention?

[porcelli]

good catch @romartin, I think we need both.

[manstis]

@romartin @porcelli,

@tiagobento said we only needed Chrome (when we were discussing WAR sized).

[porcelli]

@tiagobento is this true for the online editors? I mean... by using safari alone would still work in all browsers?

I know that it's true for VSCode, GitHub Extensions and Desktop

[tiagobento]

@porcelli Well, you're right. I don't remember if at some point we decided to only support Chrome/Safari but we can revisit that. Keep in mind that supporting Firefox will increase the size of VSCode extension and Desktop bundles.

[porcelli]

for VSCode, GitHub Extension and Desktop all we need is chrome support.

however.. online editor is a different thing.

[manstis]

@porcelli Sooooooo, it's your call..

We can add an additional profile to compile a WAR containing more permutations for online however that's the tip of the iceberg... How it's then compiled as part of the community build and how you consume it in kogito-tooling for the different channels would remain undetermined.

Please be sure to keep @romartin, @yesamer and myself informed of your decisions.

[yesamer]

@manstis I had the same idea, we can use different profiles to handle different versions of gwt.xml with different user-agent. Undoubtedly, understand how kogito-tooling can take the correct version based on the channel is a big question. Anyway, I'm available to discuss more, at the moment I have both enabled for scesim, but I planned to remove gecko engine soon. Thanks!

[romartin]

ok so it looks still unclear... :)

I'll use safari for now in BPMN as well, but please let us know guys if that should change, in some way, at some point... :)

Thanks!