Terrific! On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Isaac Truett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, the compile-with-file-name issue turned out to be a little more > complicated than my first assessment. I've added a GwtCompilerTask for > Ant that accepts a module file path, but it also needs to know the > source root. I think I could get around that by starting with the > module file name and prepending elements from the absolute path until > I find something that exists on the classpath. That'll wait for > another day, since what I have works for now. > > The build.demos target and GwtCompilerTask are available in r1130. > > > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That would be awesome! The zip isn't even necessary, as long as the > output > > represents a predictable static file structure. > > > > My guess is that 2970 will probably not be implemented right away. > You're > > right about ant, so if you like python or want to create a specialized > ant > > task, that would work. > > > > In fact, the script I'm using to upload static content to the Google app > > engine is already in python, so I'm going to have to deal with python/ant > > integration anyway. > > > > Also, in an ideal world we'd some day also generate a master index page > as > > well, so having the base demo-generator be in an expressive language > > definitely has some advantages. > > > > Thanks a million! > > > > Emily > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Isaac Truett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> > >> > Some sort of ant/python/shell/ script that crawls through the new > >> > src-demo and automatically > >> > builds all the demos there. We could then use that to easily > publish > >> > on google app engine > >> > up-to-date demos for all incubator widgets before each public drop. > >> > >> I'll volunteer for that. This is pretty easy to do in an Ant script. > >> Building the demos will be trivial if issue #2970 is accepted and > >> implemented. I'm not familiar with deploying to GAE. Would a zip file of > all > >> the compiled demos, plus a simple index.html, suffice? > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 6:02 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> I actually tend to agree with Authur here, that in gwt-incubator we > have > >>> widgets at different stages in the pipeline and while some we don't > want > >>> users to touch, others are much more stable, and would benefit from > wider > >>> user distribution and are at least as good, or better, then almost any > other > >>> available gwt library. > >>> > >>> As widgets are moved into gen2, they are being all given default style > >>> sheets though improvements are always appreciated. > >>> > >>> Internally, we've started to toy with the idea of labeling > >>> widgets/libraries: Here is the initial proposal > >>> > >>> @ReleaseCandidate: This widget has been slotted for a GWT release. Its > >>> bug reports are taken as seriously as any normal gwt widgets and its > API is > >>> less likely to change. > >>> @Beta: This is a widget intended for wide distribution and is being > >>> actively supported by at least one developer. The code should be > reasonably > >>> bug free as well. > >>> @DoNotUse or no tag: Don't use, is either in the process of being > dropped > >>> from incubator or is still in alpha. > >>> > >>> > >>> Also, here is my wish list of things I'd love to get volunteers for: > >>> > >>> A maven repository to pick up the most recent gwt-incubator + gwt-trunk > >>> milestone build. If possible, would also create a nightly build as > well. > >>> Some sort of ant/python/shell/ script that crawls through the new > >>> src-demo and automatically builds all the demos there. We could then > use > >>> that to easily publish on google app engine up-to-date demos for all > >>> incubator widgets before each public drop. > >>> Someone to go through the documentation, fix what can be easily fixed, > >>> and then e-mail out those widgets/libraries whose documentation need > serious > >>> attention. > >>> Also, someone who would be willing to go through the current demos and > >>> improve them/flag developers if they are missing and/or just suck. > >>> Finally, if people could nominate widgets they would like to see leave > >>> incubator, that would be very helpful as well! > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Arthur Kalmenson < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> OK that makes sense. Maybe we need a project that's in between > >>>> incubator and GWT, something that has regular releases and uses > >>>> polished content from the incubator but content that's not so polished > >>>> that it would go into GWT. While what's in the incubator is a work in > >>>> progress, it is still a) much faster then what the other libraries > >>>> offer, b) mostly cleaner and better written then the other libraries, > >>>> c) gives people an idea of where GWT is headed. > >>>> > >>>> While making custom widgets is easy in GWT, there is a lot of overlap > >>>> in what people need and there is usually a rich suite of widgets that > >>>> people would like out of the box. It's not very easy to pick up GWT > >>>> and dive in making great and interactive apps. There's a lot of group > >>>> work that needs to be done to build rich widgets. It seems a waste > >>>> that this group work is done on every GWT project by all the various > >>>> organizations that use GWT. I know that the GWT team said GWT was > >>>> meant to be pretty low level and they wanted the community to build on > >>>> top of that, but it seems that the community is not delivering. I know > >>>> Bruce mentioned that better widgets are on the agenda, so I don't > >>>> know.... > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Arthur Kalmenson > >>>> > >>>> On Oct 10, 4:36 pm, "Isaac Truett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > We don't want people to be afraid of the Incubator, but we do want > >>>> > them to > >>>> > be cautious. It isn't a library per se, but a workshop for ideas. > >>>> > Things in > >>>> > the Incubator may be half finished or in the middle of refurbishing > at > >>>> > any > >>>> > given time. It's an environment where you may have to get your hands > >>>> > dirty. > >>>> > It's not something that all GWT users will have the patience or risk > >>>> > tolerance for. > >>>> > Improving the contents of the Incubator is, of course, important. > >>>> > That's > >>>> > what it's there for. But I would expect that as things are "cleaned > >>>> > up" > >>>> > they'll be promoted to the main GWT project or spun off into > separate > >>>> > libraries. What's left in the Incubator will always be > >>>> > works-in-progress. > >>>> > > >>>> > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Arthur Kalmenson > >>>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > Hello everyone, > >>>> > > >>>> > > There was some discussion on the IRC channel about this, and I > >>>> > > figured > >>>> > > I'd put it up for everyone here. > >>>> > > >>>> > > I think that the incubator has a lot of useful things (FooBundle, > >>>> > > CssResource, DatePicker), a lot of great ideas (Declarative UI) > and > >>>> > > some not so great things (PagingScrollTable). The incubator has a > >>>> > > lot > >>>> > > of potential, it just needs some polish and promotion. I think it > >>>> > > needs the following: > >>>> > > >>>> > > 1. Better and nicer examples of widgets and use of some nice CSS > >>>> > > (just > >>>> > > use one of the GWT themes). > >>>> > > 2. Clean up the existing widgets and make them easier to use. > >>>> > > 3. A showcase to show off all these widgets and make them > accessible > >>>> > > like the main GWT showcase. > >>>> > > 4. Promoting incubator as a great resource on the regular GWT > group > >>>> > > and on the main GWT site. > >>>> > > >>>> > > As it stands right now, few people know about the incubator and > >>>> > > those > >>>> > > that do are usually scared away. Most people end up going to > widget > >>>> > > libraries like ExtGWT and others. Just about every widget library > >>>> > > I've > >>>> > > seen is poorly done and ends up giving GWT a really bad name > (ExtGWT > >>>> > > especially). I think the incubator can offer a much better and > >>>> > > cleaner > >>>> > > widget library and components, but it needs to be cleaned up and > >>>> > > promoted so more people contribute and give feedback. > >>>> > > >>>> > > What do you think? > >>>> > > >>>> > > Regards, > >>>> > > Arthur Kalmenson > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand > >>> binary, and those who don't" > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand > > binary, and those who don't" > > > > > > > > > > > -- "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't" --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
