Sorry, I reread your post quite a few times and I am still feeling fuzzy if I had the comprehension to understand it.
I've tried this before, mixing the gwt compilation output of all the modules into the same folder in the war. I don't think that is necessary. If I wanted all the modules in the same war context folder, I simply have more than one entry-point modules within the same source directory. And then gwt would compile, say you have five entry-points in the same source directory, and all the five output war context folders would contain the same contents. Every of the five context output folders contains the compiled of all the five entry-points. What I think you are trying to do is wanting to use the same url context for, say, five different gwt compiled entry-point js. You cannot copy only the nocache.js files. You have to copy the other files too because the brand of the browser would determine which files are used. Inside a the nocache.js, you will find a translation table mapping browser type to the js file to be used. Therefore, I don't think getting our fingers dirty by copying the output into a single context folder should be done. At the worst, you should create more than one entry-points within the same gwt source path. Even that, I don't recommend because gwt compilation is repeated n- squared times, n = number of modules. You should use the module rename-to attribute and then have a single launch html to load all five modules. Still, even that I would not recommend. Why would you want to load all five modules when your user would then choose to only use one of the five. I am trying to understand why you can't have a single entry-point module and five non-entry-point module and then inside your gwt java source refer to these modules and let gwt manage the loading in an optimal way. I am feeling I don't understand your problem too well because, I still can't figure out why you cannot have a single entry- point module whose gwt.xml inherits the other modules. Which is what I do as I too have multiple applications being accessed from the same context url. We should not be thinking about Reflection. We should design our applications with Interfaces or with a common super-class module. So that, depending on user choice, since all our modules implement a particular interface, we are able to direct our various applications to load or execute in a commonly recognised way. Thousands apologies if I misunderstood your post. -- 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.
