> > I'm not sure about validation. Many people don't use it and I sorta > think GWT's validation support ought to be split out of gwt-user into a > separate jar. If there's no actual bug than I'm inclined to leave it > alone for now.
This would absolutely kill compatibility with gwt-validation. ( https://code.google.com/p/gwt-validation/) That would make it almost impossible to get gwt-validation to work with future versions of GWT because of the multiple classpath issues that would be introduced. Further: most people don't use the javax.validation package included with GWT. There are also a fair few people, around 100 I'd estimate, that use gwt-validation and would have to investigate something else if this change was made. v/r Chris On Friday, June 8, 2012 2:02:44 PM UTC-4, Brian Slesinsky wrote: > > Moving org.json into gwt-dev makes sense because the compiler actually > uses it. I'd like to see it repackaged, but perhaps we can wait until > someone complains? > > I'm not sure about validation. Many people don't use it and I sorta > think GWT's validation support ought to be split out of gwt-user into a > separate jar. If there's no actual bug than I'm inclined to leave it > alone for now. > > But I wasn't around when these decisions were made, so I could use some > historical context. > > > https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1731804/diff/1/dev/build.xml > File dev/build.xml (right): > > https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1731804/diff/1/dev/build.xml#newcode116 > > dev/build.xml:116<https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1731804/diff/1/dev/build.xml#newcode116dev/build.xml:116>: > > <fileset dir="${gwt.tools.redist}"> > Do you know what the difference is between gwt.tools.lib and > gwt.tools.redist? If we're going to include JSON here, I'm wondering if > we should move the jar to lib. > > https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1731804/ > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
