I too have seen many negative comments on SmartGWT. I am not associated with the project in any way, but I do use it for several projects lately. I do agree that some of it is difficult to debug/ understand do to the extensive use of JSNI. However, I have received great forum-based support, and I use the LGPL version. That coupled with the continued improvement of the library make it a great choice. Ntm, the license makes me happy.
But I am encouraged by the wrapping of Qooxdoo (finally) at http://www.ufacekit.org/index.php?cat=02_Qooxdoo&page=01_QxWT. On Feb 11, 7:00 am, ckendrick <[email protected]> wrote: > Just to sum up, the only people in this thread reporting negative > hands-on experiences with SmartGWT have all gone against our explicit > advice in the documentation, FAQ, and in some cases, personal > attention in the forums. > > The only person with hands-on experience claiming there are bugs > turned out to be talking about a particular, narrow Calendar > enhancement that he was displeased had not received more attention. > > The actual samples should be self-explanatory. The functionality > demonstrated is extremely broad and deep, the code required is clear > and concise, it's difficult to find a bug and what few exist are > addressed quickly. > > See for yourself. > > http://www.smartclient.com/smartgwt/showcase/ > http://www.smartclient.com/smartgwtee/showcase/ -- 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.
