now works browserify, considering publishing to npm

[ghost]

These patches detect the presence of module.exports and assign accordingly. I saw there was already a shim for AMD define() so I put this patch right next to it.

I also added a check to see if this === window in the constructor so that the new is optional in front of SockJS. Plus I added a var in front of the SockJS = so that the SockJS reference won't leak out when the whole module is wrapped in a closure, like browserify does. In the main window context doing var assigns onto window anyways so this change shouldn't have any impact.

I put some things in the .npmignore that would likely be troublesome in publishing to npm and added a "main" field, so this package should be suitable for an npm publish! Just adjust the version field.

When this package hits npm in browserify people will just be able to require('sockjs-client') which is much handier

[majek]

The patch looks good. But I don't really get the rationale. SockJS-client only works in browser context, right? Can you explain would I like to do 'require' on it?

[ghost]

Module systems like browserify let you do require() in the browser: http://github.com/substack/node-browserify

[majek]

Merged as 45417a1 to dev branch. Thanks!

[majek]

I guess I should push sockjs-client to npm now, right?

[husio-org]

I am trying to bundle this package with browserify. Looks like this patch never made it to master, or did it?

browserify is a great package manager and also allows to share modules between client and server. we find it very useful.

Also looked into bower with no luck.

[yocontra]

Did this ever happen? This version of sockjs-client doesn't seem to be available on npm

[Fauntleroy]

Any chance this will be resolved? I'd like to use Sockjs with browserify and this is a blocker.

[stephenhandley]

+1

[gabegorelick]

+1 https://www.npmjs.org/package/sockjs-client appears to be a Node client, not a browser client

[amasad]

why did this never make it in?

[brycekahle]

I will get this published soonish. I think there is some confusion around this and the node SockJS client. Ideally there wouldn't be two clients, but that might take more time. Ideas on how to clarify until then?

[amasad]

maybe in the name? sockjs-node-client and/or sockjs-browser-client

[yocontra]

Why is there a difference?

[amasad]

I'm guessing because on node it simply uses node's http library, but in the browser the transports are WebSocket, xhr, iframe, all the other fallbacks etc. And they don't want to ship node code to browsers or browser code to node. Just guessing

[yocontra]

IMO sockjs should take the same approach engine.io takes with this problem - one library but skip the upgrade chain and go straight to websockets on node

[3rd-Eden]

yes, because building the exact same library makes sense right ;-)?

[piranna]

The usage of the http module on browser is perfectly acceptable. It's logical that there would be only one client package, both fro Node.js and browsers.

[brycekahle]

1.0 will have the same client for node and browsers published to npm as sockjs-client.

[brycekahle]

Heads up that 1.0.0-beta.4 has been published to npm, and all future versions will be too.