Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Investigate the need for usage of backend_prod_files after webpack #6964

Open
vojtechjelinek opened this issue Jun 17, 2019 · 1 comment
Open

Investigate the need for usage of backend_prod_files after webpack #6964

vojtechjelinek opened this issue Jun 17, 2019 · 1 comment
Assignees
@vojtechjelinek
Labels
code-health enhancement Label to indicate an issue is a feature/improvement

Comments

@vojtechjelinek
Copy link
Member

vojtechjelinek commented Jun 17, 2019 •
edited

We used backend_prod_files for serving JavaScript and HTML files with Jinja since we are moving away from Jinja we might be able to get rid of backend_prod_files. Investigate if we need backend_prod_files anymore.
@vojtechjelinek vojtechjelinek self-assigned this Jun 17, 2019
@vojtechjelinek vojtechjelinek mentioned this issue Jun 17, 2019
Merged
8 tasks
@vojtechjelinek vojtechjelinek added this to Most Important (user-facing) in Speed improvements Jun 17, 2019
@vojtechjelinek vojtechjelinek moved this from Most Important (user-facing) to Important (refactoring) in Speed improvements Jun 24, 2019
@jacobdavis11
Copy link
Member

@vojtechjelinek how is this going?

@kevintab95 kevintab95 added the enhancement Label to indicate an issue is a feature/improvement label Aug 30, 2022
@seanlip seanlip removed this from Medium priority in Speed improvements Oct 11, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@vojtechjelinek vojtechjelinek

Labels
code-health enhancement Label to indicate an issue is a feature/improvement
Projects
Speed Improvements Task Force
Status: In Progress
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@vojtechjelinek @seanlip @kevintab95 @jacobdavis11