On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 6:32:28 AM UTC+1, bendg25 wrote: > > If you abstract out the integration point to start up the embedded server, > then it would be easy to swap it out.
Why would you abstract it out? CodeServer is a tool that listens on a port and does HTTP, why would you abstract the way it does HTTP? (the embedded server that host your webapp in DevMode is swappable though: http://www.gwtproject.org/javadoc/latest/com/google/gwt/core/ext/ServletContainerLauncher.html & http://www.gwtproject.org/doc/latest/DevGuideCompilingAndDebugging.html#What_options_can_be_passed_to_development_mode; I believe the main usecase was AppEngine support, and the AppEngine servlet container launcher uses an isolated ClassLoader IIRC) I understand that you want to run everything in a single JVM (why? I can only see drawbacks, apart from "there's only one thing to launch and thus no need to remember the order you have to launch things") but that's just not a usecase GWT was designed to support. It could be made to work, and you're encouraged to come discuss this in the gwt-contrib forum <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/google-web-toolkit-contributors> and possibly send in patches, but it's low priority – plus, supporting other use cases also means making sure you don't break them moving forward, so it's not just a one-time effort, but a continuous one). BTW, there's a pending change already to bump Jetty to 9.x: https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/7857 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
