You might want to look at this article: http://claudiushauptmann.com/a-framework-for-gwt-multipage-applications.html
On Nov 16, 5:36 am, Davis Ford <davisf...@zenoconsulting.biz> wrote: > I'm doing this now. I set the project up this way several months ago and it > works great for me. The only real con is double compile-time, but I don't > care about that. I even have a feature where I can show a view of one > application inside another, which is very cool. > > Here's how I set it up --http://zenoconsulting.wikidot.com/blog:16 > > <http://zenoconsulting.wikidot.com/blog:16>Regards, > Davis > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 8:24 AM, rolf <r...@squarebox.co.uk> wrote: > > What's the best way to create a web app with multiple entry points but > > a lot of common code (eg. common widgets and dialogs) shared between > > them, as well as a common server back end? Currently I'm creating > > multiple modules and multiple HTML pages within a single web app but > > I'm also worried about scalability. The different entry points > > correspond to different workflows depending on what the user is trying > > to do, or perhaps customised versions of the interface for particular > > customers. > > > I guess I should probably have a single module and top level entry > > point and then switch between interfaces from there but that will > > involve a lot of code refactoring. > > > -Rolf > > > On Nov 14, 11:50 am, Sripathi Krishnan <sripathi.krish...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > Multiple modules is the wrong way to use GWT. > > > > GWT highly recommends using a single module. Most of the performance > > > optimizations GWT does relies on the fact that you have a single, > > monolithic > > > module. Plus, as you observed, the time to build your application keeps > > > growing as you add more modules, so it doesn't scale well. > > > > Part of the problem is deciding whether you are building a "Web App" or a > > > "Web Site". Lots of > > > discussions< > >http://www.clyral.com/za/pages/web/website_vs_webapplication.html>can > > > be found on this topic. > > > > GWT is great if you want to build a Web App. Typically, there is only a > > > single HTML page, and different "screens" are manipulated on the client > > side > > > using DOM. But if you are building a traditional, multi-page Web Site > > > (nothing wrong with that), then GWT is not for you. You are better off > > using > > > one of the many javascript libraries. > > > > So, lets assume you decide you want to build a web-app, and want to use > > GWT > > > to do so. To get started, stick to a single HTML page with a single GWT > > > Module/Entry Point. Adding multiple "screens" is adding a new FlowPanel > > or > > > Composite with your content. Or perhaps, you have all "screens" built > > into > > > the original HTML page, and you just hide/unhide the divs based on user > > > action. > > > > The above approach works well if you have a few (say less than 10) > > screens. > > > If your application grows bigger and more complex, you would want to > > start > > > following some established patterns. The MVP pattern has been touted as > > the > > > "way to build web-apps". Just do a google search, there are a lot of > > > articles on that subject. Also, catch Ray Ryan's talk on GWT Architecture > > > and best practices< > >http://code.google.com/events/io/2009/sessions/GoogleWebToolkitBestPr...>. > > > > --Sri > > > > 2009/11/13 David C. Hicks <dhi...@i-hicks.org> > > > > > Specifically, I'm curious about the use of GWT Modules in a project. > > > > > Each time we have a new "screen" to create, we have been adding a new > > > > module to our project. Of course, with each new module, there is an > > > > additional build cycle to generate the Javascript for that module. > > What > > > > I'm wondering is if this is normal, or does it make more sense to try > > to > > > > build up whole applications in a single module and perhaps keep the > > > > build time down? Each new module we add appears to increase our build > > > > time by about 1.5 minutes. It won't be long and this will be way > > beyond > > > > painful. > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Dave > > > > > -- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups > > > > "Google Web Toolkit" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to > > google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs > > > > cr...@googlegroups.com><google-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs > > cr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > . > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=. > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Google Web Toolkit" group. > > To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs > > cr...@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=. > > -- > Zeno Consulting, Inc. > home:http://www.zenoconsulting.biz > blog:http://zenoconsulting.wikidot.com > p: 248.894.4922 > f: 313.884.2977 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
