As noted in the post - we didn't get around to trying Domino REST. By the time we discovered it, we'd already made the decision to stick with GWT-RPC and move on to other work. It's possible we'd revisit that, but we'd probably want to see some worked examples of how to transition from GWT-RPC to Domino REST. We already burnt quite a few cycles digging into the depths of alternates only to find they came up short. So it's hard to justify going back there to do more of that at this stage when GWT-RPC still works.
On Tuesday, 25 July 2023 at 15:43:06 UTC+1 Michael Conrad wrote: > Did y'all test DominoKit? It is actively maintained and has a REST module. > I'm curious if you did test it what shortcomings you may have run into. > > On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 9:23:53 AM UTC-4 RobW wrote: > >> We got to a similar point. Looked in depth at moving the GWT front end to >> a REST API - but found two big drawbacks: >> >> 1. none of the frameworks we could find had async callback handling >> similar to GWT-RPC, with common interface classes client server side AND >> support JAX-RS subresources. RestyGWT got close apart from those last two >> points - there is a model with common client/server interfaces, but it >> doesn't support subresources. We found at least 1 other GWT REST toolkit >> that had exactly the same issue - so it's clearly not a trivial one to >> solve. >> 2. somewhat more serious than the first issue was that none of the >> GWT REST API frameworks looked to be that actively maintained, at least >> tracking their GitHub commits anyhow >> >> So ultimately, although REST API an attractive route, GWT-RPC remains >> more practical for us in the near term. >> >> Note - one we didn't explore in depth but may come back too was Domino >> Kit, which has a REST API component. That did look more actively maintained >> and perhaps is a way forward. >> >> On Monday, 24 July 2023 at 18:50:38 UTC+1 Ralph Fiergolla wrote: >> >>> That is, as long as I stay within GWT there is no need to change (and >>> loose type checking and convenience). I will happily stay with GWT RPC then! >>> >>> R >>> >>> Jens <[email protected]> schrieb am Mo. 24. Juli 2023 um 18:24: >>> >>>> >>>> I think I asked the question before: as a long-term GWT-RPC user, what >>>> would be the benefit of moving to some other RPC protocol/mechanism? >>>> >>>> >>>> Depends on your situation of course. If you want to use your existing >>>> backend with other clients written in other languages then GWT-RPC is a >>>> bad >>>> fit. While the wire format of GWT-RPC is documented, you still need to >>>> write the client code to generate it. Also GWT-RPC supports inheritance >>>> which other languages you want to use might not support. Other JS based >>>> RPC >>>> solutions as well as general purpose solutions like gRPC typically do not >>>> support inheritance. >>>> >>>> GWT-RPC will already be annoying if you decide to have some portions of >>>> your app being written in a different framework since it is easier to find >>>> developers for that framework, e.g. angular, svelte, react, whatever. You >>>> would then need to define a JS api that calls into GWT code so these >>>> frameworks can talk to your GWT-RPC backend (or you need to provide new >>>> endpoints in your backend that do not talk GWT-RPC). >>>> >>>> -- J. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>> 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 view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit/ab08b131-3904-49b1-8920-b924c7b31c9an%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit/ab08b131-3904-49b1-8920-b924c7b31c9an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit/692de019-081b-4612-ba19-a9dd3783ac5dn%40googlegroups.com.
