Cookbook — a documentation application — launched
Yesterday, the Cake team launched a new application: cookbook (see also the announcement). It is thought to be the place for the manual of CakePHP 1.2 (and hence will replace http://tempdocs.cakephp.org when its content has been moved to the cookbook application). It is a kind of moderated wiki: you can edit the content, but those changes have to be approved before they go live.
One thing the team should improve is the speed of the application, it is really slow (and I don’t think it is my internet connection). My guess is that the menu structure slows down the application, maybe it can be cached?
It looks like it is the Javascript that is killing the application. It run much smoother if you disable it.
It run super-fast for me on a crappy Vista laptop
Looks like the speed is a local issue. Runs fine for me in Safari, FF2, and IE6 in a WinXP VM.
If you can tell us where it’s slow for you, we’ll give it a look. I’d have to concur with the others, though. I haven’t noticed any slowness.
@All: Thanks for your comments!
@John: As lemp already said, it is the Javascript that slows down the application. The execution of scripts.js takes around 3-4 seconds according to Firebug. I tested it with FF 2.0.0.12 (Linux/Win) and with Konqueror.
with all book urls or one in particular?
I doubt the js is optimal however: for me FF 2.0.0.12 (Linux/Win) is fine. How can I reproduce your slowness ;).
@AD7six: It is with all book urls slow. Maybe you have to use an older computer to reproduce it ;-)
I use IE6 on WinXP and its also terribly slow.
It’s noticeably slow (all urls) for me.
Fact: scripts.js alone always takes at least 2.2 sec to load.
pack the javascript at least then? use the built in cake way !
I have noticed the js on the mnue taking a while to render too, on a Mac ibook g4 1.3Ghz, firefox / opera 9.5 so perhaps it is suffering on older macs? JS differs a lot by browser I find - opera 9.5 is pretty good compared to FireFox with Firebug on, for a crude example.
@Luke: I don’t think packing scripts.js would make a big difference, as the size of that file is already quite small.