I think it could really (really) be interesting to get OOPHM with 1.6, is it so much work John (why not using a generator for the overlay classes, Sanjiv seems to use this kind of tool for SmartGWT) ?
I was using OOPHM as a early adopter since the beginning and with the incompatibilities between OOPHM and the new war directory layout, there is no way to provide you for feedback and I have lost in term of productivity (compile time is still so slow in 1.6) btw, runAsync was slated for the release after 1.6 and it is still in the trunk for a while now, does it mean that the scope is being changed ? Sami On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 7:54 AM, John Tamplin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Vitali Lovich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Darn. Would there be any branch that does work? > > > Do you mean a branch of 1.6? No, as it would be too much work to maintain > it. OOPHM has always been slated for the release after 1.6, and it > currently exists as an overlay of particular classes in gwt-dev, so when > those classes are changed corresponding changes have to be made to the > overlay classes. > > Eventually, OOPHM will replace legacy hosted mode entirely in trunk, and we > can have a single gwt-dev.jar with no native code (branches/oophm is already > setup that way). > > > -- > John A. Tamplin > Software Engineer (GWT), Google > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
