I'm not contributor of GWT but like the framework very much and already use
it since 2008 or so...
I see that GWT / J2CL still has the potential to make Java devs productive.
In my last experience a lot of Java devs in my division want to use Vue.js
and now I see that we need to educate all of them with JavaScript, Vue.js
and they are not productive yet. So you see a lot of JavaScript /
Vue.js spaghetti code. Not nice.
But now back to this discussion. I actually like the "devmode" like what
@elias uses.
Why?
- For *demo purpose* it is great, you just run one process (jetty +
codeserver), that's it, you can directly show the result. You don't need to
run 2 processes.
- I always separate the client / server project but I don't want to
build my server project with the help of GWT Maven project. Why?
- There are a lot of server projects out there: Spring Boot,
Micronaut, Quarkus, PHP, Dot-NET, Apache only, NGINX only, etc. So I want
to *generate the server code using the tools offered by the servlet
framework*. E.g. Spring Boot: on the server part I generate the Maven
project of Spring Boot using Spring Boot
- So actually for deployment I just *copy* the result of the
JavaScript (client) to the directory of the server framework and run the
server.
What I don't understand so far, why does Jetty disturbs the whole classpath
concept? *I only use devmode on the client *and on the client I don't have
server libs... Is it not possible just to use the needed Jetty server for
GWT (I'm not sure where else do we need the Jetty libs in GWT code)?
Because actually I don't care what version of Jetty should be used in
GWT... the main thing: *I could run web server + code server in the same
process *with one execution.
Another possibility: run the Jetty for devmode in the GWT Maven plugin? So
you only have the Jetty on the classpath of the Maven plugin?
To show you my use case, here is an example:
https://github.com/gwtboot/domino-rest-enum-date
Just my 2 cents,
Lofi
[email protected] schrieb am Montag, 19. April 2021 um 19:05:52 UTC+2:
> >>I also understand, that no one likes such changes, but nobody is forcing
> anyone to upgrade. He and his team can use his setup for the next 20 years,
> if he wants to.
>
> We always try to upgrade to latest stable version of any technology we use.
> GWT 2.9.0 then J2CL etc.
> If something is broken or gets discontinued we get locked to an older
> version.
> So, indeed nobody is forcing anyone to upgrade but not upgrading is not a
> good option either.
> e.g. if DevMode with embedded Jetty gets removed we are stuck with current
> GWT version, not good.
>
> >>I am very thankful for all the work which was put into GWT.
>
> Great work indeed.
>
> > If we are to save GWT, not only we should drop ALL deprecated stuff ASAP
>
> We could remove Java 7 support perhaps.
>
> On Monday, 19 April 2021 at 11:52:05 UTC+1 [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> I am catching up on some statements in the last mails.
>>
>> > First, let me say that I both understand and sympathize for the cases
>> Elias describes: when you have sufficiently large team and/or project, even
>> small changes in workflow could be extremely painful.
>> > No one likes that and I can understand why not only Elias but probably
>> many other may feel reluctant (to be polite) about any
>> non-backward-compatible changes.
>>
>> I also understand, that no one likes such changes, but nobody is forcing
>> anyone to upgrade. He and his team can use his setup for the next 20 years,
>> if he wants to.
>>
>> > I really don't see how investing into tech that has been deprecated for
>> years could benefit project in general.
>>
>> 100% agree!
>>
>>
>> > If we are to save GWT, not only we should drop ALL deprecated stuff
>> ASAP
>>
>> 100% agree!
>>
>>
>> I have the feeling, that a small minority is blocking all the innovations
>> (by not allowing do drop deprecated stuff) and make life hard for GWT
>> maintainers and thus blocking us all from more/faster innovations.
>> I would suggest just not listening to them.
>>
>> I am very thankful for all the work which was but into GWT.
>> I can use it free-of-charge.
>> Unfortunately, I am not good enough as a coder to become a maintainer,
>> but I did and will donate to various GWT / GWT related projects and I can
>> say „thank you“ and support their journey to have a maintainable GWT stack
>> without old stuff.
>>
>> If there are big enterprises with big GWT projects, they sure have the
>> money to either upgrade the software and train their stuff to a recent GWT
>> setup or to hire someone who backports stuff for them if really necessary.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT
Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/5a89d64d-0f07-4351-9053-fa5cfe7c3abcn%40googlegroups.com.
