Tnx Thomas for this detailed and valuable answer.
For software creators of my generation (born 1956), the immensely
attractive argument of GWT was : "you can create WEB apps (complex
and powerfull web apps) by just using the best langage you ever
used : Java, and all the formal benefits behind Java (OO thinking
was the key turn in software history, and Java is the most usable
effect of that).
THAT ("Only Java") made GWT a brillant approach. Developers like
me are not interested in technologies, langages, etc... per se: we
just want the most powerful tools to turn conceptualization
process into running software, with minimal technology
concerns. Learning new technogies is "wasted time" if it does not
help on that.
Hearing that 3.0 will be a "bundle", our key concern is "How many
technologies should we (learn?) mix and organize to work
together?". Knowing from my experience that technology mixing
=> unpredicable inconsistencies incompatibilities, probable
interferences, or unclear bug responsability, I am rather
skeptical about this evolution.
I see GWT as a promising path facing now a dead end road.
Disappointing. Just hoping that the 2.8.x branch will survive 10
years....
Anyway thanks again for your explanations Thomas.
PG
On 08/23/2016 04:15 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
On Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 3:39:26 PM UTC+2, Philippe Gonze
wrote:
" the fact that 2.8 will be maintained in
parallel. (Jens) " !?!
We would certainly appreciate to know more about this
fact (announced? published? where?).
(and you can read echoes of it many times here since then)
As a matter of fact, if version 3.0 is in line with
various statements read here and there on the web
(disparition of widget library, disparition of RPC), we
would certainly prefer version 2.8.x to any 3.dead
versions !
We think the 2.8 branches will continue to attract more
developers than the 3.x branches.
But in any case, the first need is a fair vision of
the future of GWT. Something like an 'official'
statement, or at least a target roadmap.
There's no such thing yet.
If both branches are maintained (hopefully), we suggest
a better version naming. Version 3.0 should receive a
radically different name, and version 3.0 should succeed
to 2.8 on the 'classic' branch...
Reality is that most of the work is done by Google, and
Google wants to move on to a new compiler (J2Cl). If Google no
longer works on the GWT 2.x compiler, GWT 2.x is going to die,
as I can't see anyone putting enough energy to make it live.
Because “GWT 3.0” is going to be based on J2Cl, which
removes GWT.create(), this is going to be a breaking change no
matter what. This is why it'd been decided that the 2.x branch
would be maintained in parallel to the 3.x branch, but it'll
likely only remain a "maintenance branch" (understand: bug
fixes, but I believe you can kiss goodbye to any JDT upgrade,
so no Java 9 for you; and probably no new Java 8 emulated APIs
–think java.time et al. unless they come before real work on
3.x has begun), mostly there so that people have time (2
years? maybe more) before switching to GWT 3.0.
That being said, "GWT 3.0" will likely be a "bundle" of
various projects (similar to the Eclipse bundles released
every year): J2Cl, the Java Runtime Emulation library (unless
it comes with J2Cl), Elemental, etc. see
also https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/google-web-toolkit-contributors/uhSgR5CWBK8
(as you can see, nothing's clear yet, so no "official
statement" or "target roadmap"), and as such Google likely
will never use "GWT 3.0" per se, that one really being a
community-lead project.
For now, Google needs to make an MVP of their new compiler
and make its sources public; then only we can start talking
about what GWT 3.0 might look like, built around that new
compiler, and start really testing things against it; in the
meantime all we can do is handwave, throw FUD, or more
constructively prepare for the inevitable demise of
GWT.create(), particularly for those features that Google does
not use themselves (they will "port" the ones they use), and
all third-party projects. Work has begun already for a few of
these things.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in
the Google Groups "GWT Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/google-web-toolkit/udNQeQ6cK8A/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
|
Philippe Gonze
Address: Rue de la bruyère 12 / 1428 Lillois / BE
Phone : 00.32.473580758
Skype : matscape
www.gonze.org
|
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
|