> We weren't really burned by using what we did but we did learn a > lesson and I was hoping just to get feedback on others experiences. > > It seems that this wasn't the proper place.
Thank you for sharing your experience. I think this is definitely the right place to talk about it. -- Arthur Kalmenson On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:22 PM, cloudycity <[email protected]> wrote: > > When I asked the question originally I didn't mean to cause so much > contention. We started using gwt 8 months ago when the basic gwt > wasn't as complete and had only 8 months to get a working app up. > There were 3 developers and at the time it was difficult to understand > the pros and cons of the various 3rd party libraries. We were > impressed by the "shininess" and ease of getting an app up enough to > be functional for our customers. > > A lot has happened to gwt in the last 8 or 9 months and we have > realized that we traded off getting the job done versus performance > and the bugs in the 3rd party libs. We also underestimated the effort > in working around various bugs and weird behavior. > > It is still easy to look at the "shininess" and resist using some of > the other than GWT options - especially when marketing and other > "suits" ask why we can't do this or that or why aren't we using MS > technologies, and on and on. There still isn't a lot of shininess in > the basic GWT that you don't have to build yourself. > > We weren't really burned by using what we did but we did learn a > lesson and I was hoping just to get feedback on others experiences. > > It seems that this wasn't the proper place. > > Tom aka cloudycity > > > On Dec 18, 5:54 am, "Arthur Kalmenson" <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Rob, >> >> Judging from cloudcity's response, not everyone is aware of the draw >> backs of these libraries (or, as you put it, my position on them). >> Ignoring an issue is not going to make it go away. I'm letting people >> know what the draw backs of using these libraries are, because a lot >> of people are impressed by the shininess but are unaware of the >> numerous problems. Anyway, I'm not here to start a flame war, I'm just >> trying to warn people before they commit all their resources to these >> libraries. >> >> -- >> Arthur Kalmenson >> >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Rob Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Did anyone ask you opinion on use of third part libs in this thread. >> > We know what your position is on using 3rd party libs and you have >> > made it clear "numerous" times. Repeating the same thing again and >> > again is just adding noise to this group. Gmail has a wonderful filter >> > option and you can set yours to ignore any thread that mentions any >> > lib that you don't care about :) >> >> > On Dec 17, 3:34 pm, "Arthur Kalmenson" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'm hoping that a lot of those things will be added to the incubator >> >> in the near future. I've mentioned the request for simpler security >> >> similar to Spring Security's @Secured("ROLE_USER") annotations. Data >> >> binding and validation frameworks are on their way as well, in the >> >> near future. >> >> >> I would stay away from ExtGWT or SmartGWT though. >> >> >> -- >> >> Arthur Kalmenson >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:54 AM, [email protected] >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > This does bring up a good point and something that is sourly missing. >> >> > We have cobbled together some very generic type stuff patterned >> >> > (albeit very low in quality) what we used extensively in Eclipse Rich >> >> > Client. Maybe the ExtGWT guys or SmartGWT will come up with >> >> > something. Or if the Eclipse Web Client guys would do GWT.... Or if >> >> > I could find a spare moment or two, I'd take it on. The whole UI >> >> > framework beyond "widgets", like editors, views, menus, actions etc. >> >> > is a sweet spot to be sure that is missing from any of the web >> >> > frameworks, IMHO. >> >> >> > On Dec 17, 6:54 am, "Arthur Kalmenson" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> There are some things in the incubator for status bars and logging. >> >> >> The rest you would have to do yourself. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Arthur Kalmenson >> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Riyaz Mansoor >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I'm not looking for rich widget sets (Ext, Smart, etc) but rather is >> >> >> > there a GWT framework that provides basics for a RIA. One that >> >> >> > handles >> >> >> > the grunt work such as providing; status bar, xml or other >> >> >> > configurable menu, error logging report, authentication, security etc >> >> >> >> > This maybe reaching for the sky but kinda like what Eclipse or >> >> >> > Netbeans provides as the core platform when developing on those >> >> >> > platforms.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
