Absolutely,

1)

On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 4:15:07 PM UTC-4, Ray Cromwell wrote:
>
> Can you summarize the implementation differences?
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Chris Ruffalo <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> > We've been over this before, I think, and several problems have gotten in
> > the way.  It's not that we don't want to cooperate, we do, but I think 
> that
> > it's too divergent from the way that GWT works and wants things to work.
> >
> > I also know it doesn't really conform to GWT's code style.
> >
> > The goal, initially, was for gwt-validation to be included in gwt as the
> > default.  I don't know that GWT needs it's own fully-compliant JSR-303
> > framework.  Plus gwt-validation is only around 55% compliant anyway at 
> r328.
> >
> > But know that the gwt-validation project leadership (i.e. me) has no 
> problem
> > with this.
> >
> > v/r
> >
> > Chris Ruffalo, gwt-validation project lead
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, April 7, 2012 2:21:51 AM UTC-4, Gilberto Pacheco Gallegos
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> There is another project that seems to be more advanced than current
> >> status: http://code.google.com/p/gwt-validation/ ¿Is there a chance to
> >> include it's work?
> >
> > --
> > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Reply via email to